Ayurveda comprising of Ayur (life) and Veda (Scince or knowledge) is a holistic healing science which is in other words called “Science of life”.
Ayurveda deals with the complete way of life, rather than just the treatment of diseases.Basic principlesAyurveda considers the humanity and universe as a common origin, and considers nature to […]
Showing posts with label Breast Cancer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Breast Cancer. Show all posts
Friday, April 11, 2008
Sunday, November 04, 2007
Successful Breast-Feeding
(HealthDay News) -- More American women are choosing to breast-feed. That's the good news.
The discouraging news is that the percentage of women breast-feeding still falls short of national objectives, often because they experience problems or difficulties that are easily overcome, according to lactation experts.
Seventy-four percent of women who gave birth in 2004 initiated breast-feeding, up from 70.9 percent of women who delivered babies in 2000, according to a new report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But that was still a bit short of the objectives set by the federal government's Healthy People 2010 initiative, which had hoped to have 75 percent of new mothers breast-feeding in 2004.
The number of women who were breast-feeding exclusively was even smaller. Just 30.5 percent of the women who delivered babies in 2004 breast-fed exclusively through age 3 months of age, although the national objective was 60 percent.
So, why aren't more women breast-feeding and for longer periods? Experts say that even new mothers who know all about the benefits of breast-feeding for their baby -- including protection from lower respiratory and middle-ear infections as well as a reduction in the risk of childhood obesity -- can get discouraged and give up.
Some of the most common reasons cited for stopping breast-feeding include sore or cracked nipples, not producing enough milk, a baby having difficulty feeding, or the perception that the baby wasn't satisfied by breast milk.
But breast-feeding also provides the mother with benefits. It helps speed the recovery of her body after birth, and recent studies have suggested that breast-feeding may lower a woman's risk of certain cancers, including breast cancer, and type 2 diabetes.
Here are some experts' best tips on succeeding with breast-feeding -- even if you're a beginner:
The discouraging news is that the percentage of women breast-feeding still falls short of national objectives, often because they experience problems or difficulties that are easily overcome, according to lactation experts.
Seventy-four percent of women who gave birth in 2004 initiated breast-feeding, up from 70.9 percent of women who delivered babies in 2000, according to a new report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But that was still a bit short of the objectives set by the federal government's Healthy People 2010 initiative, which had hoped to have 75 percent of new mothers breast-feeding in 2004.
The number of women who were breast-feeding exclusively was even smaller. Just 30.5 percent of the women who delivered babies in 2004 breast-fed exclusively through age 3 months of age, although the national objective was 60 percent.
So, why aren't more women breast-feeding and for longer periods? Experts say that even new mothers who know all about the benefits of breast-feeding for their baby -- including protection from lower respiratory and middle-ear infections as well as a reduction in the risk of childhood obesity -- can get discouraged and give up.
Some of the most common reasons cited for stopping breast-feeding include sore or cracked nipples, not producing enough milk, a baby having difficulty feeding, or the perception that the baby wasn't satisfied by breast milk.
But breast-feeding also provides the mother with benefits. It helps speed the recovery of her body after birth, and recent studies have suggested that breast-feeding may lower a woman's risk of certain cancers, including breast cancer, and type 2 diabetes.
Here are some experts' best tips on succeeding with breast-feeding -- even if you're a beginner:
- Don't assume breast-feeding is "innate."
- "That's a myth. It's kind of like thinking all men can fix all cars."
Mothers who choose to breast-feed need education and support, agreed Karen Bonuck, associate professor of family and social medicine at Montefiore Medical Center and Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City, who has published studies on breast-feeding practices.
- Get help -- early.
Ask your health-care provider for information about breast-feeding early in your pregnancy, Bonuck advised women. Don't wait until you're six months or more along, she said. Too many other activities -- baby showers, getting the nursery ready, thinking about names -- take your attention during those final months of pregnancy.
- Take a breast-feeding class.
Ask your doctor if your hospital has one. Or see a lactation consultant -- you can ask your doctor or the La Leche League for a referral. You should make these preparations before you'll be ready to breast-feed, Lebbing and Bonuck advised.
Just a few sessions with a lactation consultant can pay off, Bonuck said. "You will understand the normal physiology of how the milk is produced," she said. The consultant, working with a doll, can help women practice the best positions to breast-feed and get comfortable with the concept.
- Be sure the hospital personnel know you want to breast-feed.
"Make your wishes known," Bonuck said. "Some [hospitals] have cards that say, 'Breast-feed only.' " That reduces the risk of confusion and your baby mistakenly getting a bottle of formula, Bonuck said. She also advises mothers-to-be to tell the hospital staff about other preferences, such as no pacifiers.
- Breast-feed as soon as your baby is born.
Breast-feeding immediately after birth -- even before the baby is cleaned up -- is preferable, Bonuck said. "Bring an advocate with you," she suggested. This person will help to make sure your wishes are carried out.
- Keep the baby with you as much as possible while in the hospital.
"Make your wishes known," Bonuck advised. She prefers keeping the baby in the mother's room, not in the nursery, because it gives mother and baby a chance to practice breast-feeding. "It's not a spa," she said of the hospital stay.
- Get help once you return home.
Enlist the support of family members or friends once you are back home, Lebbing advised. "You need someone to cook and help around the house, especially in the first month," she said. If you have other children, get some child-care help. Relieving some of the stress of a newborn can help new moms focus on the important task of breast-feeding, Bonuck and Lebbing said.
More information
To learn more about breast-feeding, visit La Leche League International.
Monday, September 17, 2007
Genetics Hold Promise, Challenges for Cancer Care
(HealthDay News) -- Someday in the future, people may routinely have doctors scan their personal genomes, looking for this or that aberrant gene to help prevent, spot or treat a cancer.
"We are in the midst of both an evolution and a revolution in cancer care," said Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer at the American Cancer Society.
While gene-specific treatments such as the leukemia "wonder drug" Gleevec are already on the scene, "we still have an incredibly long way to go in terms of how we understand the basic genetics of cancer," he said.
"Right now, we are working still at a very crude level -- the future will be much more dynamic," Lichtenfeld said.
The "genetics generation" has much to be proud of, however. The mapping of the human genome in the late 1990s, the advent of high-output methods to comb through thousands of genes, and a deepening knowledge of the complexities of DNA and RNA are bringing new discoveries each week.
Some of the highlights from just the past year:
Last August, a U.S. team announced the first-ever gene test aimed at pinpointing which patients with early stage lung cancer will benefit from post-operative chemotherapy, and which can be spared the arduous treatment.
That same month, Canadian researchers reported on a new model to speed the identification of mutations linked to a silent killer, ovarian cancer. Spotting those genes could pinpoint women at risk.
A $100 million U.S. project called the Cancer Genome Atlas announced its first major achievement in September -- the mapping of genomes for breast and colon cancer. Scientists say they were able to identify 100 mutations thought responsible for each of those malignancies.
In March, British scientists reported that they had pinpointed 100 mutated genes that help drive more than 210 different cancer types. "This set of genes is known to regulate key functions in virtually all cell processes of growth, differentiation," researcher Andrew Futreal, of the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute in Cambridge, said at the time.
And, in April, a team at Duke University said it had found genes that encourage breast cancer's spread to the lungs, as well as mutations that hamper chemotherapy's therapeutic effects.
It all looks very promising. But Lichtenfeld said that every DNA discovery has its downside, too.
"The more that we learn, the more complex it is going to get," he said. Indeed, the mapping of the breast and colon cancer genomes revealed that not only were the two cancers radically different in their origins, but that each tumor differed greatly between patients.
It's quickly become a very tangled web, experts say, but that's an inevitable part of the science.
"There may be a period of greatly evolving complexity that we have to get through which will only be sorted out by doing larger numbers across more genes," Futreal said.
Complicating matters further is the emerging field of epigenetics -- the study of how genes change their activity as they respond to their environment.
Still, certain "commonalities" could simplify things. Futreal pointed out that even though hundreds of genes can go awry and cause a cancer, many of these mutations will target the same cellular pathway. So, treatments that repair those broken pathways could fix a host of tumor types, he reasoned.
Today, however, only a small minority of cancer patients are directly benefiting from gene-based diagnostics or treatments. Those include women who carry the BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 breast cancer mutations, patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) who can take Gleevec, and early stage lung cancer patients who may soon benefit from those new prognostic tests.
And even when Americans find out that they do carry a certain gene posing an added risk, finding a qualified genetics counselor to sort it all out can be tough. There are only a handful of these experts in Lichtenfeld's hometown, Atlanta, he said, and they're practically unheard of in smaller centers.
"Most physicians simply aren't familiar with all the implications of assessing a woman's risk for breast cancer, for example, [or] of understanding all the genetic issues," Lichtenfeld noted. "So, I think that our theory right now is better than our practice. Our practice clearly needs to get better."
Nevertheless, things are greatly improved from decades past, when a patient with a family history of cancer was simply told to watch and wait and hope.
In the case of the BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 genes -- thought to cause up to 10 percent of breast cancers -- women now have real options to cut their risk, Lichtenfeld said. Using high-tech tests to spot the genes, women can make tough but potentially lifesaving decisions to have a breast removed or to take anti-cancer drugs such as tamoxifen to cut their odds for cancer by up to 80 percent.
Other tests aimed at spotting the HER-2 cancer gene and its product protein can dictate whether a patient's breast tumor will react favorably to the drug Herceptin.
"Many of these decisions aren't any easier than they were in the past, but at least now, they are much better informed," Lichtenfeld said. "And, looking into the future, this is going to become so much more a part of our diagnosis -- our ability to diagnose before we even see cancer. Typing the kind of cancer a patient has, too. And it's all going to become a huge part of cancer treatment."
More information
Find out more about cancer genetics at the American Cancer Society.
more discussion: Forum
· Addiction Forum · Ask the Doctors Forum · Ayurveda Forum · Ayurvedic & Thai Herbs Forum · Colon Cleansing Forum · Dental Forum · Diabetes Forum · Diet Forum · General Cleansing Forum · Hepatitis A, B. C Forum · Integrated Medicine Forum · Live Blood Analysis Forum · Ozone-Oxygen-Forum · pH - Alkaline - Acidity Forum · Weight Loss Forum
"We are in the midst of both an evolution and a revolution in cancer care," said Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer at the American Cancer Society.
While gene-specific treatments such as the leukemia "wonder drug" Gleevec are already on the scene, "we still have an incredibly long way to go in terms of how we understand the basic genetics of cancer," he said.
"Right now, we are working still at a very crude level -- the future will be much more dynamic," Lichtenfeld said.
The "genetics generation" has much to be proud of, however. The mapping of the human genome in the late 1990s, the advent of high-output methods to comb through thousands of genes, and a deepening knowledge of the complexities of DNA and RNA are bringing new discoveries each week.
Some of the highlights from just the past year:
Last August, a U.S. team announced the first-ever gene test aimed at pinpointing which patients with early stage lung cancer will benefit from post-operative chemotherapy, and which can be spared the arduous treatment.
That same month, Canadian researchers reported on a new model to speed the identification of mutations linked to a silent killer, ovarian cancer. Spotting those genes could pinpoint women at risk.
A $100 million U.S. project called the Cancer Genome Atlas announced its first major achievement in September -- the mapping of genomes for breast and colon cancer. Scientists say they were able to identify 100 mutations thought responsible for each of those malignancies.
In March, British scientists reported that they had pinpointed 100 mutated genes that help drive more than 210 different cancer types. "This set of genes is known to regulate key functions in virtually all cell processes of growth, differentiation," researcher Andrew Futreal, of the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute in Cambridge, said at the time.
And, in April, a team at Duke University said it had found genes that encourage breast cancer's spread to the lungs, as well as mutations that hamper chemotherapy's therapeutic effects.
It all looks very promising. But Lichtenfeld said that every DNA discovery has its downside, too.
"The more that we learn, the more complex it is going to get," he said. Indeed, the mapping of the breast and colon cancer genomes revealed that not only were the two cancers radically different in their origins, but that each tumor differed greatly between patients.
It's quickly become a very tangled web, experts say, but that's an inevitable part of the science.
"There may be a period of greatly evolving complexity that we have to get through which will only be sorted out by doing larger numbers across more genes," Futreal said.
Complicating matters further is the emerging field of epigenetics -- the study of how genes change their activity as they respond to their environment.
Still, certain "commonalities" could simplify things. Futreal pointed out that even though hundreds of genes can go awry and cause a cancer, many of these mutations will target the same cellular pathway. So, treatments that repair those broken pathways could fix a host of tumor types, he reasoned.
Today, however, only a small minority of cancer patients are directly benefiting from gene-based diagnostics or treatments. Those include women who carry the BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 breast cancer mutations, patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) who can take Gleevec, and early stage lung cancer patients who may soon benefit from those new prognostic tests.
And even when Americans find out that they do carry a certain gene posing an added risk, finding a qualified genetics counselor to sort it all out can be tough. There are only a handful of these experts in Lichtenfeld's hometown, Atlanta, he said, and they're practically unheard of in smaller centers.
"Most physicians simply aren't familiar with all the implications of assessing a woman's risk for breast cancer, for example, [or] of understanding all the genetic issues," Lichtenfeld noted. "So, I think that our theory right now is better than our practice. Our practice clearly needs to get better."
Nevertheless, things are greatly improved from decades past, when a patient with a family history of cancer was simply told to watch and wait and hope.
In the case of the BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 genes -- thought to cause up to 10 percent of breast cancers -- women now have real options to cut their risk, Lichtenfeld said. Using high-tech tests to spot the genes, women can make tough but potentially lifesaving decisions to have a breast removed or to take anti-cancer drugs such as tamoxifen to cut their odds for cancer by up to 80 percent.
Other tests aimed at spotting the HER-2 cancer gene and its product protein can dictate whether a patient's breast tumor will react favorably to the drug Herceptin.
"Many of these decisions aren't any easier than they were in the past, but at least now, they are much better informed," Lichtenfeld said. "And, looking into the future, this is going to become so much more a part of our diagnosis -- our ability to diagnose before we even see cancer. Typing the kind of cancer a patient has, too. And it's all going to become a huge part of cancer treatment."
More information
Find out more about cancer genetics at the American Cancer Society.
more discussion: Forum
· Addiction Forum · Ask the Doctors Forum · Ayurveda Forum · Ayurvedic & Thai Herbs Forum · Colon Cleansing Forum · Dental Forum · Diabetes Forum · Diet Forum · General Cleansing Forum · Hepatitis A, B. C Forum · Integrated Medicine Forum · Live Blood Analysis Forum · Ozone-Oxygen-Forum · pH - Alkaline - Acidity Forum · Weight Loss Forum
Monday, June 18, 2007
Vitamin D Cuts Cancer Risk: Study
(HealthDay News) -- Boosting your vitamin D intake can dramatically reduce your risk of breast and other cancers, a new study found.
The research adds to growing evidence that vitamin D can help protect against many forms of cancer as well as other diseases, Creighton University researchers said.
But an American Cancer Society spokeswoman urged caution in interpreting the findings, saying it was premature to recommend taking vitamins to reduce cancer risk.
Joan Lappe, a Creighton University professor of medicine and nursing and lead author of the study, said, "What we can say from our study is that 1,100 international units (IUs) a day of vitamin D definitely decreased the incidence of cancer."
That amount of the vitamin is nearly triple the recommended intake for the age group studied -- women who were 55 and older when the four-year study started.
Lappe's team followed 1,179 study participants who were all postmenopausal and lived in rural Nebraska. The women were free of known cancers for the 10 years before entering the study. They were assigned to one of three groups and followed for four years.
One group took 1,400 to 1,500 milligrams of supplementary calcium a day, another group took that same amount of calcium plus 1,100 IUs of vitamin D daily, while the third group took placebo pills every day.
After four years, those in the combination vitamin D and calcium group had a 60 percent lower risk of developing cancer, compared to the placebo group. The calcium-only group had a 47 percent reduced risk.
Then the researchers eliminated data from the first year of the study, figuring some women may have entered the study with cancer that had not yet been diagnosed. The results were more dramatic, Lappe said.
When the researchers looked at results from just the last three years of the trial, they found the combination calcium-and-vitamin D group had a 77 percent reduced risk of cancers, compared to the placebo group. The risk for the calcium-only group was essentially unchanged.
In all, a total of 50 women got non-skin cancers during the study, with breast cancer the most common. The other cancers included lung and colon tumors.
The findings are published in the June edition of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
In May, Harvard Medical School researchers reported in the Archives of Internal Medicine that high intakes of vitamin D and calcium cut the risk of breast cancer by nearly one-third in premenopausal women, but not women past menopause.
Dr. Michael Holick, professor of medicine, physiology and biophysics at the Boston University School of Medicine and a long-time vitamin D researcher, said the Lappe study adds to growing evidence of the health and disease-fighting effects of vitamin D.
"It's very clear the data are significant," he said of the Lappe study.
Vitamin D is thought to act through the immune system to help prevent the formation of abnormal cells, Lappe said.
To date, both Lappe and Holick said, high intake of vitamin D has been found to reduce the risk of many forms of cancer as well as type 1 diabetes, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis and high blood pressure.
Both researchers think the current recommendations for daily vitamin D intake should be boosted. The U.S. Institute of Medicine, which makes recommendations on vitamin and mineral requirements, considers 200 IUs of vitamin D adequate for children and adults up to age 50;
400 IUs adequate for adults 51 to 70, and 600 for those 71 and older. The levels aren't Recommended Dietary Allowances, or RDAs, because the institute doesn't think there's enough evidence to establish an RDA for vitamin D.
"I think it's safe to say the current recommendations are much too low," Lappe said, adding that postmenopausal women should "probably be taking 1,100 IUs a day."
She recommends vitamin D3 supplements, the type used in the study, over D2, because D3 is more active, she said.
But Marji McCullough, strategic director of nutritional epidemiology for the American Cancer Society, who is familiar with the new study and other similar research, said in a prepared statement that the society doesn't currently recommend taking vitamin or mineral supplements to reduce cancer risk. But it has joined other health organization to weigh the evidence of vitamin D, and a joint panel recommends supplementation and small amounts of ultraviolet exposure "as the best way to achieve proper vitamin D status."
While she called the new study "intriguing,'' she said the number of participants was small and the research needs to be replicated before firmer conclusions can be drawn.
Discuss vitamin D intake with your doctor. And be aware that the Institute of Medicine has declared that 2,000 IUs is the upper tolerable, or safe, level for most people. For babies up to 1 year old, the limit is 1,000 IUs, McCullough said.
Vitamin D, which is important for strong bones, is found in salmon and other fish, and fortified milk and fortified cereals, among other foods.
Supplements aren't the only potential way to fight disease. In the same issue of the journal, another report found that a high intake of whole grain foods reduced the risk of atherosclerosis, or hardening of the blood vessels, which can lead to heart disease.
U.S. researchers tracked 1,178 men and women, from 40 to 69 years old at the start of the study, and found that eating more whole grains was associated with a lower risk of atherosclerosis.
More information
To learn more about vitamin D and cancer, visit the American Cancer Society.
The research adds to growing evidence that vitamin D can help protect against many forms of cancer as well as other diseases, Creighton University researchers said.
But an American Cancer Society spokeswoman urged caution in interpreting the findings, saying it was premature to recommend taking vitamins to reduce cancer risk.
Joan Lappe, a Creighton University professor of medicine and nursing and lead author of the study, said, "What we can say from our study is that 1,100 international units (IUs) a day of vitamin D definitely decreased the incidence of cancer."
That amount of the vitamin is nearly triple the recommended intake for the age group studied -- women who were 55 and older when the four-year study started.
Lappe's team followed 1,179 study participants who were all postmenopausal and lived in rural Nebraska. The women were free of known cancers for the 10 years before entering the study. They were assigned to one of three groups and followed for four years.
One group took 1,400 to 1,500 milligrams of supplementary calcium a day, another group took that same amount of calcium plus 1,100 IUs of vitamin D daily, while the third group took placebo pills every day.
After four years, those in the combination vitamin D and calcium group had a 60 percent lower risk of developing cancer, compared to the placebo group. The calcium-only group had a 47 percent reduced risk.
Then the researchers eliminated data from the first year of the study, figuring some women may have entered the study with cancer that had not yet been diagnosed. The results were more dramatic, Lappe said.
When the researchers looked at results from just the last three years of the trial, they found the combination calcium-and-vitamin D group had a 77 percent reduced risk of cancers, compared to the placebo group. The risk for the calcium-only group was essentially unchanged.
In all, a total of 50 women got non-skin cancers during the study, with breast cancer the most common. The other cancers included lung and colon tumors.
The findings are published in the June edition of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
In May, Harvard Medical School researchers reported in the Archives of Internal Medicine that high intakes of vitamin D and calcium cut the risk of breast cancer by nearly one-third in premenopausal women, but not women past menopause.
Dr. Michael Holick, professor of medicine, physiology and biophysics at the Boston University School of Medicine and a long-time vitamin D researcher, said the Lappe study adds to growing evidence of the health and disease-fighting effects of vitamin D.
"It's very clear the data are significant," he said of the Lappe study.
Vitamin D is thought to act through the immune system to help prevent the formation of abnormal cells, Lappe said.
To date, both Lappe and Holick said, high intake of vitamin D has been found to reduce the risk of many forms of cancer as well as type 1 diabetes, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis and high blood pressure.
Both researchers think the current recommendations for daily vitamin D intake should be boosted. The U.S. Institute of Medicine, which makes recommendations on vitamin and mineral requirements, considers 200 IUs of vitamin D adequate for children and adults up to age 50;
400 IUs adequate for adults 51 to 70, and 600 for those 71 and older. The levels aren't Recommended Dietary Allowances, or RDAs, because the institute doesn't think there's enough evidence to establish an RDA for vitamin D.
"I think it's safe to say the current recommendations are much too low," Lappe said, adding that postmenopausal women should "probably be taking 1,100 IUs a day."
She recommends vitamin D3 supplements, the type used in the study, over D2, because D3 is more active, she said.
But Marji McCullough, strategic director of nutritional epidemiology for the American Cancer Society, who is familiar with the new study and other similar research, said in a prepared statement that the society doesn't currently recommend taking vitamin or mineral supplements to reduce cancer risk. But it has joined other health organization to weigh the evidence of vitamin D, and a joint panel recommends supplementation and small amounts of ultraviolet exposure "as the best way to achieve proper vitamin D status."
While she called the new study "intriguing,'' she said the number of participants was small and the research needs to be replicated before firmer conclusions can be drawn.
Discuss vitamin D intake with your doctor. And be aware that the Institute of Medicine has declared that 2,000 IUs is the upper tolerable, or safe, level for most people. For babies up to 1 year old, the limit is 1,000 IUs, McCullough said.
Vitamin D, which is important for strong bones, is found in salmon and other fish, and fortified milk and fortified cereals, among other foods.
Supplements aren't the only potential way to fight disease. In the same issue of the journal, another report found that a high intake of whole grain foods reduced the risk of atherosclerosis, or hardening of the blood vessels, which can lead to heart disease.
U.S. researchers tracked 1,178 men and women, from 40 to 69 years old at the start of the study, and found that eating more whole grains was associated with a lower risk of atherosclerosis.
More information
To learn more about vitamin D and cancer, visit the American Cancer Society.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Rheumatoid Arthritis Boosts Cancer Death Risk: Study
(HealthDay News) -- Rheumatoid arthritis doesn't increase the risk of developing cancer but does boost a person's risk of dying from a malignancy should it arise, a U.K. study finds.
The study, published in the March issue of Arthritis & Rheumatism, included 2,105 patients with recent-onset inflammatory polyarthritis (IP) who were followed for 10 years. Over time, many cases of new-onset IP develop into rheumatoid arthritis.
During the 10-year period, 123 people developed different kinds of cancer, including bone, lung, breast, prostate, urinary, colon, blood and brain cancers. The researchers compared the rates of cancer among the study participants to rates among the general population.
Overall, patients with IP did not have higher rates of cancer than people in the general population, although they did have a higher risk of blood cell cancers. The study did find a 40 percent increased risk of death among people with both IP/rheumatoid arthritis and cancer.
"The results of this study demonstrated that 5-year cancer survival in patients with IP is substantially reduced in comparison with that in the general population, even after adjusting for differences in age, sex, and cancer site, whereas the overall cancer incidence does not seem to be increased," noted lead researcher Dr. Alan Silman, an epidemiologist at the University of Manchester.
Further research is required in order to determine whether targeted cancer therapies could improve the survival rate for cancer patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
More information
The Arthritis Foundation has more about rheumatoid arthritis.
The study, published in the March issue of Arthritis & Rheumatism, included 2,105 patients with recent-onset inflammatory polyarthritis (IP) who were followed for 10 years. Over time, many cases of new-onset IP develop into rheumatoid arthritis.
During the 10-year period, 123 people developed different kinds of cancer, including bone, lung, breast, prostate, urinary, colon, blood and brain cancers. The researchers compared the rates of cancer among the study participants to rates among the general population.
Overall, patients with IP did not have higher rates of cancer than people in the general population, although they did have a higher risk of blood cell cancers. The study did find a 40 percent increased risk of death among people with both IP/rheumatoid arthritis and cancer.
"The results of this study demonstrated that 5-year cancer survival in patients with IP is substantially reduced in comparison with that in the general population, even after adjusting for differences in age, sex, and cancer site, whereas the overall cancer incidence does not seem to be increased," noted lead researcher Dr. Alan Silman, an epidemiologist at the University of Manchester.
Further research is required in order to determine whether targeted cancer therapies could improve the survival rate for cancer patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
More information
The Arthritis Foundation has more about rheumatoid arthritis.
Saturday, November 18, 2006
New Drug Boosts Breast Cancer Survival
(HealthDay News) -- Certain breast cancer patients who switch to the aromatase inhibitor drug anastrozole (Arimidex) after two to three years of treatment with tamoxifen live longer and are more likely to remain cancer-free, German researchers report."A lot of people have been waiting to see whether aromatase inhibitors will show a survival advantage, and I think these data will assure them that 5 years of tamoxifen is no longer the standard of care; the best treatment for women with hormone-sensitive early-stage breast cancer should include an aromatase inhibitor," lead author and professor Walter Jonat, University of Kiel, said in a prepared statement.
His team published the findings online Friday in The Lancet medical journal.
Jonat and his colleagues analyzed data from three studies that compared outcomes for postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive early-stage breast cancer who either received tamoxifen for five years or changed to anastrozole after 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen treatment.
"We showed the benefits of switching to anastrozole in terms of disease and recurrence-free survival that have been seen in the individual trials translate into a significant benefit in overall survival," Jonat said.
More research is needed in order to answer a number of questions, he said, including optimal length of treatment; whether tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors should be given first; and whether any combination of other drugs may provide even better patient outcomes.
More information
The U.S. National Cancer Institute has more about breast cancer treatments.
Saturday, October 28, 2006
How much risk reduction is associated with hormone therapy?
Tamoxifen given for five years to women with hormone-responsive breast cancer lowers the risk of recurrence by 40 percent per year, and the overall benefit will be close to a one-third reduction in risk. There is no consistent evidence of benefit with tamoxifen beyond five years. In addition, the risk of developing uterine cancer increases with more exposure, so after five years you get no additional benefit, but you keep adding risk.
The last few years have given us new options in adjuvant hormone therapy for postmenopausal women. It now looks increasingly like substituting or switching to or following that tamoxifen with an aromatase inhibitor further improves outcome.
We have three large randomized trials as of May of 2004, all of which show the same thing: The risk of a recurrence of breast cancer in the breast or a recurrence of breast cancer outside the breast is more greatly reduced when a woman is on a aromatase inhibitor compared to tamoxifen.
The last few years have given us new options in adjuvant hormone therapy for postmenopausal women. It now looks increasingly like substituting or switching to or following that tamoxifen with an aromatase inhibitor further improves outcome.
We have three large randomized trials as of May of 2004, all of which show the same thing: The risk of a recurrence of breast cancer in the breast or a recurrence of breast cancer outside the breast is more greatly reduced when a woman is on a aromatase inhibitor compared to tamoxifen.
What are the hormone therapy choices?
If a breast cancer has estrogen and progesterone receptors, which means that these hormones may fuel the growth of these cancers, the treatment options are broader.
Tamoxifen, of course, is the gold standard, and this drug is given to women with hormone-responsive breast cancer. It attaches to the estrogen receptor and deprives the cancer of a needed hormone.
It thereby starves the cancer cell of a needed nutrient, if you will. The aromatase inhibitors do this by shutting off the residual production of estrogen at sites outside the ovaries. But they're in a sense doing the same thing as tamoxifen.
Tamoxifen, of course, is the gold standard, and this drug is given to women with hormone-responsive breast cancer. It attaches to the estrogen receptor and deprives the cancer of a needed hormone.
It thereby starves the cancer cell of a needed nutrient, if you will. The aromatase inhibitors do this by shutting off the residual production of estrogen at sites outside the ovaries. But they're in a sense doing the same thing as tamoxifen.
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Study Suggests Vitamin D May Help Fight Breast Cancer
(HealthDay News) -- Women with early stage breast cancer have significantly higher levels of vitamin D in their blood than women with cancer that has spread to other parts of the body, a small study found.This could mean that a lack of vitamin D somehow plays a role in the spread of the disease. However, it's way too early to make specific recommendations based on the findings, experts say.
"It's an interesting concept but it's a small study and needs to be done in a large, randomized, controlled fashion," said Dr. Jay Brooks, chairman of hematology/oncology at Ochsner Health System in Baton Rouge, La.
"There are no real practical implications as such yet, from a lifestyle point of view, all women (and men) should eat a balanced diet and ensure they are exposed to some sunlight, as this is important in vitamin D synthesis," added the study's lead author, Dr. Carlo Palmieri, of Cancer Research UK Laboratories and Imperial College, London.
Previous research has hinted at a role for vitamin D in cancer prevention. In laboratory studies, vitamin D stopped cancer cells from dividing and also contributed to cell death. And epidemiological reviews suggest that breast cancer incidence and mortality is lower in latitudes with more sunlight.
Sunlight is critical for health because it allows the skin to synthesize vitamin D. Another recent study found that vitamin D may lower the risk of breast and ovarian cancer. Vitamin D is also known to enhance the function of certain genes -- including p21, which is involved in the cell life cycle -- while inhibiting the function of others.
For the new study, published online Monday in the Journal of Clinical Pathology, the researchers measured vitamin D levels, parathyroid hormone and calcium in 204 women with early breast cancer; 279 women with invasive breast cancer; and 75 women with advanced breast cancer. All participants were Caucasian.
Women with early stage breast cancer had higher levels of vitamin D and lower levels of parathyroid hormone than women with advanced disease. Calcium levels were similar.
The exact reason for the disparities isn't clear, the study authors stated. Nor is it clear that there's a cause-and-effect relationship between the presence of vitamin D and cancer prognosis.
"Our study showed an association," Palmieri said. "In other words, women with advanced breast cancer had lower vitamin D, and the question is whether this is cause or effect."
Still, Palmieri said, the findings should be viewed in the context of all the other available data on vitamin D -- data that seem to support the hypothesis that vitamin D is somehow involved in breast cancer.
"Our data lends weight to the hypothesis that vitamin D has a role in the pathogenesis and progression of breast cancer," he said.
One next step for researchers, Palmieri said, would be to see if maintaining normal levels of vitamin D -- by taking supplements -- in women diagnosed with early or advanced breast cancer improved their outcomes, when used in conjunction with the latest therapies.
More information
Visit the National Cancer Institute for more on breast cancer.
Thursday, October 19, 2006
Turmeric for Breast Cancer Prevention?
Turmeric for Breast Cancer Prevention?
Is it true that turmeric can prevent breast cancer? What can you tell me about this?
Turmeric (Curcuma longa) is the yellow spice most familiar in Indian curries and found in American prepared mustard. People whose diets are rich in turmeric have lower rates of breast cancer as well as prostate, lung and colon cancers, and recent research at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston suggests that curcumin, an active component in turmeric, may help prevent the spread of breast cancer. In studies of mice, researchers found that curcumin helped stop the metastasis of breast cancer cells to the lung. Human studies following up on this finding are now in progress.
In the M.D. Anderson study, researchers injected mice with breast cancer cells from a woman whose disease had spread to her lungs. The cells began to grow in the mice and then were surgically removed. The mice then were divided into four groups: one got no treatment, one got curcumin, one got the cancer drug Taxol and the fourth group got curcumin plus Taxol. Cancer spread to the lungs among half the mice in the curcumin-only group and 22 percent of those in the curcumin/Taxol group. The other groups fared far worse: among the mice that received Taxol alone 75 percent developed lung tumors; and the cancer spread to the lungs among 95 percent of the mice who were given no treatment.
While these results are exciting, we don't know yet if curcumin plus Taxol will be as effective in humans. However, the researchers were impressed enough to suggest that it might be worthwhile to give curcumin to women at high risk of breast cancer because of a family history of the disease.
My preference is for whole turmeric rather than isolated curcumin, because I believe in the synergy of all active elements in botanical medicines. I wish researchers would get off the reductionistic bandwagon and come around to appreciate the inherent complexity of nature. Whole turmeric extracts are the way to go; I always recommend them to patients rather than products containing isolated curcumin.
Turmeric is useful for all inflammatory disorders and for autoimmune conditions. It also may have a role in the prevention and treatment of Alzheimer's disease. (Elderly villagers in India appear to have the lowest rate of Alzheimer's in the world, perhaps due to the fact that Indians eat turmeric with almost every meal. Some animal studies have shown that curcumin blocked the formation and accumulation of the plaque that characterizes Alzheimer's.)
Overall, turmeric appears to have significant anti-inflammatory and cancer-protective effects. These seem most evident at doses well below pharmaceutical strength, which suggests that it would be wise to consume more foods spiced with turmeric. But getting enough in food is not easy for Westerners. We are not familiar with using it, and large amounts taste bitter. Other than supplements, the best way I've found to consume turmeric is in the form of a cold, unsweetened tea. This is a popular beverage in Okinawa, the island culture famed for health and longevity. Convenient, tasty, instant forms of turmeric tea are easy to get there. I'm working to make them available through this Web site. Stay tuned.
Andrew Weil, M.D.
Is it true that turmeric can prevent breast cancer? What can you tell me about this?
Turmeric (Curcuma longa) is the yellow spice most familiar in Indian curries and found in American prepared mustard. People whose diets are rich in turmeric have lower rates of breast cancer as well as prostate, lung and colon cancers, and recent research at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston suggests that curcumin, an active component in turmeric, may help prevent the spread of breast cancer. In studies of mice, researchers found that curcumin helped stop the metastasis of breast cancer cells to the lung. Human studies following up on this finding are now in progress.
In the M.D. Anderson study, researchers injected mice with breast cancer cells from a woman whose disease had spread to her lungs. The cells began to grow in the mice and then were surgically removed. The mice then were divided into four groups: one got no treatment, one got curcumin, one got the cancer drug Taxol and the fourth group got curcumin plus Taxol. Cancer spread to the lungs among half the mice in the curcumin-only group and 22 percent of those in the curcumin/Taxol group. The other groups fared far worse: among the mice that received Taxol alone 75 percent developed lung tumors; and the cancer spread to the lungs among 95 percent of the mice who were given no treatment.
While these results are exciting, we don't know yet if curcumin plus Taxol will be as effective in humans. However, the researchers were impressed enough to suggest that it might be worthwhile to give curcumin to women at high risk of breast cancer because of a family history of the disease.
My preference is for whole turmeric rather than isolated curcumin, because I believe in the synergy of all active elements in botanical medicines. I wish researchers would get off the reductionistic bandwagon and come around to appreciate the inherent complexity of nature. Whole turmeric extracts are the way to go; I always recommend them to patients rather than products containing isolated curcumin.
Turmeric is useful for all inflammatory disorders and for autoimmune conditions. It also may have a role in the prevention and treatment of Alzheimer's disease. (Elderly villagers in India appear to have the lowest rate of Alzheimer's in the world, perhaps due to the fact that Indians eat turmeric with almost every meal. Some animal studies have shown that curcumin blocked the formation and accumulation of the plaque that characterizes Alzheimer's.)
Overall, turmeric appears to have significant anti-inflammatory and cancer-protective effects. These seem most evident at doses well below pharmaceutical strength, which suggests that it would be wise to consume more foods spiced with turmeric. But getting enough in food is not easy for Westerners. We are not familiar with using it, and large amounts taste bitter. Other than supplements, the best way I've found to consume turmeric is in the form of a cold, unsweetened tea. This is a popular beverage in Okinawa, the island culture famed for health and longevity. Convenient, tasty, instant forms of turmeric tea are easy to get there. I'm working to make them available through this Web site. Stay tuned.
Andrew Weil, M.D.
Believing Cancer Myths?
Believing Cancer Myths?
I have been told that the smell of burnt coffee means you have cancer. I've also heard other cancer myths. Can you debunk some common ones?
I've never heard the one about burnt coffee and haven't been able to track it down. But there are plenty of other cancer myths in circulation:
I have been told that the smell of burnt coffee means you have cancer. I've also heard other cancer myths. Can you debunk some common ones?
I've never heard the one about burnt coffee and haven't been able to track it down. But there are plenty of other cancer myths in circulation:
- Cancer spreads when exposed to air during surgery: This is the most widely believed cancer myth, according to a 2005 survey by the American Cancer Society (ACS). Nearly 41 percent of respondents to a telephone survey of 957 adults in the United States said that they believed that cancer can spread throughout the body during surgery. In fact, cancer does not spread during surgery, which can be highly effective treatment for many malignancies. The ACS study was published in the June 27, 2005 online issue of the journal Cancer.
- The medical industry is withholding a cure for cancer because there's too much money in treating patients: More than 27 percent of the survey respondents held this view and another 14 percent weren't sure. This conspiracy theory is nonsense. First of all, cancer is not one disease but many. It is unlikely that any single "cure" would work for all of them. Besides there has been impressive progress. The ACS notes that only a few decades ago fewer than one in 10 children with leukemia survived 10 yeas after diagnosis. Today's treatment has raised the cure rate to almost 80 percent. Similar advances have been made in curing Hodgkin's lymphoma, bone and kidney cancers in children, and testicular cancer. Just ask Lance Armstrong.
- Injuries can lead to cancer: This old wives tale has been around for more than a century. It was disproved a long time ago. The only known instances where cancer can stem from injuries are related to chemical burns. Swallowing caustic liquids is a risk factor for cancer of the esophagus, and skin cancer sometimes develops in scars caused by chemical or thermal burns.
- Antiperspirants cause breast cancer: This persistent Internet hoax warns that antiperspirants or deodorants contain substances that can be absorbed through the skin or enter the body through nicks caused by shaving. There's no evidence to support this idea and, in fact, a study published in the Oct. 16, 2002 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute found no increased breast cancer risk among women who reported using underarm deodorants or antiperspirants, those who used these products after shaving with a blade razor, and those who used the products within one hour after shaving with a blade razor. Other studies have reported similar results.
Andrew Weil, M.D.
Friday, October 06, 2006
'Chemo Brain' in Cancer Survivors Is Real: Study
(HealthDay News) -- "Chemo brain," characterized by chronic problems with memory and attention, afflicts a sizeable minority of cancer survivors.
Now, researchers say the condition may be linked to brain metabolism and blood flow changes that can endure for more than a decade.
The new study, published in the Oct. 5 online edition of Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, should help refute the view that chemo brain is just a figment of patients' imaginations.
"Many women who have had chemo for breast cancer are suffering from cognitive problems for many years after their chemo is finished, and this is the first direct examination of the brain that identifies long-term, if not permanent, changes in brain metabolism related to those cognitive problems," said study lead author Dr. Daniel H.S. Silverman, of the department of molecular and medical pharmacology at the University of California's David Geffen School of Medicine in Los Angeles.
Although chemo brain has been spotted among survivors of other forms of cancer, such as lymphoma, Silverman's group focused on breast cancer patients because the disease is the second-leading cancer killer of American women after lung cancer.
Each year, more than 211,000 American women are diagnosed with breast cancer, the researchers noted, and anywhere from approximately 25 percent to 80 percent of those who undergo chemotherapy complain of later onset of cognitive difficulties.
Silverman stressed, however, that not every breast cancer patient who undergoes chemo suffers from chemo brain, and that many of those who do experience only mild symptoms.
"The impact tends to be relatively subtle," Silverman said. "These are not basic losses of cognition that are going to be noticed when doing easy things. It's more a question of being unable to maintain attention and concentrate when trying to accomplish demanding and high-functioning tasks."
Nevertheless, for some of those who experience this cognitive disruption, the impact can be debilitating. That's why Silverman and his colleagues looked for underlying mechanisms to better understand the condition.
Using positron emission tomography -- commonly known as PET -- the UCLA team scanned the brains of 21 former breast cancer patients who had had tumors surgically removed between five and 10 years prior to this study.
Sixteen of the women had undergone chemotherapy, while the remaining five had had surgery alone. Scans were also conducted for 13 women of similar age and backgrounds with no history of breast cancer or chemotherapy.
The researchers observed brain blood-flow patterns as participants engaged in short-term memory exercises lasting about 10 minutes. They also measured brain metabolism after the exercise.
Silverman's team found that the post-chemo patients experienced relatively large blood flow "spikes" to certain parts of the brain when performing the mental tasks. This group also executed the tasks 13 percent less well than the non-chemo and non-cancer groups.
As well, former chemotherapy recipients showed relatively low brain metabolism rates in the frontal cortex after the tasks were completed, the researchers noted.
Participants who had undergone both chemotherapy and hormonal treatments also showed about an eight percent drop in their resting metabolism in a region of the brain called the basal ganglia.
The basal ganglia is known to function as a bridge between thought and action, the researchers noted.
Putting all the facts together, Silverman's team said the task-related blood flow jumps in the brains of former chemotherapy recipients indicated increased brain activity. That may mean that the chemo group were starting from a neurological disadvantage -- working harder (and with less success) to complete the tasks than those who had never undergone such treatment.
"Chemo-brain symptoms are the single biggest impediment to the quality of life of long-term breast cancer survivors who are getting chemo at earlier and earlier stages and living longer, or even to full life expectancy," noted Silverman. "So, of course, this is discouraging news if you're trying to do something for the affected patients after the fact."
"But on the other hand," he noted, "these findings could ultimately be very encouraging in terms of trying to prevent this, because you could perhaps identify patterns of brain metabolism that could help steer individual patients toward therapy regimens that would be least harmful for them, or to terminate therapies before they cause permanent brain damage."
Dr. Claudine Isaacs, director of the clinical breast cancer program at Georgetown University, said the study was interesting but inconclusive.
"These are very provocative findings, and I think this is the way we need to go in terms of utilizing imaging studies to better understand the problem," she said. "But to know what all this means is another thing."
"The problem is that this is so multi-factorial," cautioned Isaacs. "There are so many things that go into this -- age-related influences, menopause -- and it's very difficult to tease out the different parts."
"It is also true," she added, "that other studies in this area have shown that a relative minority of patients are affected by this phenomenon, and that in substantial numbers, the problems resolve over time among those who are. So, the situation is not necessarily forever."
More information
To learn more about chemo brain, visit the American Cancer Society.
Now, researchers say the condition may be linked to brain metabolism and blood flow changes that can endure for more than a decade.
The new study, published in the Oct. 5 online edition of Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, should help refute the view that chemo brain is just a figment of patients' imaginations.
"Many women who have had chemo for breast cancer are suffering from cognitive problems for many years after their chemo is finished, and this is the first direct examination of the brain that identifies long-term, if not permanent, changes in brain metabolism related to those cognitive problems," said study lead author Dr. Daniel H.S. Silverman, of the department of molecular and medical pharmacology at the University of California's David Geffen School of Medicine in Los Angeles.
Although chemo brain has been spotted among survivors of other forms of cancer, such as lymphoma, Silverman's group focused on breast cancer patients because the disease is the second-leading cancer killer of American women after lung cancer.
Each year, more than 211,000 American women are diagnosed with breast cancer, the researchers noted, and anywhere from approximately 25 percent to 80 percent of those who undergo chemotherapy complain of later onset of cognitive difficulties.
Silverman stressed, however, that not every breast cancer patient who undergoes chemo suffers from chemo brain, and that many of those who do experience only mild symptoms.
"The impact tends to be relatively subtle," Silverman said. "These are not basic losses of cognition that are going to be noticed when doing easy things. It's more a question of being unable to maintain attention and concentrate when trying to accomplish demanding and high-functioning tasks."
Nevertheless, for some of those who experience this cognitive disruption, the impact can be debilitating. That's why Silverman and his colleagues looked for underlying mechanisms to better understand the condition.
Using positron emission tomography -- commonly known as PET -- the UCLA team scanned the brains of 21 former breast cancer patients who had had tumors surgically removed between five and 10 years prior to this study.
Sixteen of the women had undergone chemotherapy, while the remaining five had had surgery alone. Scans were also conducted for 13 women of similar age and backgrounds with no history of breast cancer or chemotherapy.
The researchers observed brain blood-flow patterns as participants engaged in short-term memory exercises lasting about 10 minutes. They also measured brain metabolism after the exercise.
Silverman's team found that the post-chemo patients experienced relatively large blood flow "spikes" to certain parts of the brain when performing the mental tasks. This group also executed the tasks 13 percent less well than the non-chemo and non-cancer groups.
As well, former chemotherapy recipients showed relatively low brain metabolism rates in the frontal cortex after the tasks were completed, the researchers noted.
Participants who had undergone both chemotherapy and hormonal treatments also showed about an eight percent drop in their resting metabolism in a region of the brain called the basal ganglia.
The basal ganglia is known to function as a bridge between thought and action, the researchers noted.
Putting all the facts together, Silverman's team said the task-related blood flow jumps in the brains of former chemotherapy recipients indicated increased brain activity. That may mean that the chemo group were starting from a neurological disadvantage -- working harder (and with less success) to complete the tasks than those who had never undergone such treatment.
"Chemo-brain symptoms are the single biggest impediment to the quality of life of long-term breast cancer survivors who are getting chemo at earlier and earlier stages and living longer, or even to full life expectancy," noted Silverman. "So, of course, this is discouraging news if you're trying to do something for the affected patients after the fact."
"But on the other hand," he noted, "these findings could ultimately be very encouraging in terms of trying to prevent this, because you could perhaps identify patterns of brain metabolism that could help steer individual patients toward therapy regimens that would be least harmful for them, or to terminate therapies before they cause permanent brain damage."
Dr. Claudine Isaacs, director of the clinical breast cancer program at Georgetown University, said the study was interesting but inconclusive.
"These are very provocative findings, and I think this is the way we need to go in terms of utilizing imaging studies to better understand the problem," she said. "But to know what all this means is another thing."
"The problem is that this is so multi-factorial," cautioned Isaacs. "There are so many things that go into this -- age-related influences, menopause -- and it's very difficult to tease out the different parts."
"It is also true," she added, "that other studies in this area have shown that a relative minority of patients are affected by this phenomenon, and that in substantial numbers, the problems resolve over time among those who are. So, the situation is not necessarily forever."
More information
To learn more about chemo brain, visit the American Cancer Society.
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
Do Diet and Exercise Prevent Breast Cancer Recurrence?
Do Diet and Exercise Prevent Breast Cancer Recurrence?
Provided by: DrWeil.com
Q: I'm a breast cancer survivor. I read that a low-fat diet reduces the risk of a recurrence. I was treated three years ago. Do you think that the diet can help me? What about exercise? -- Maureen A: A low-fat diet certainly couldn't hurt, and a new study shows that getting regular exercise can help a lot. The news that a low-fat diet reduces the rate of breast cancer recurrence comes from a study reported recently at a meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. It is the first study to demonstrate that diet directly affects breast cancer.
Of the 975 women who followed a low-fat diet, 96 (or 9.8 percent) had recurrences of their breast cancer over a five-year period compared to 181 (or 12.4 percent) of the 1,462 women who stayed on their usual diet. All of the women had undergone surgery (lumpectomy or mastectomy) followed by radiation and then hormonal therapy or chemotherapy when indicated. The women were assigned to the low-fat diet at random.
Although researchers said that more study is needed before recommending low- fat diets to all breast cancer patients, there is no reason not to cut your fat intake. Doing so will also reduce your risk of heart disease, and, if necessary, help you lose weight. (Simply losing weight after breast cancer treatment has been shown to reduce the risk of recurrence.) Interestingly, the women whose recurrence rate was lowest on the low-fat diet were those whose breast cancers were estrogen receptor negative, meaning that they didn't depend on estrogen to grow.
Researchers from the University of California at Los Angeles who conducted the low-fat diet study limited the women to an average of 33.3 grams of fat per day, a little more than one ounce of fat, compared to the 51.2 grams of fat per day consumed by the women who followed their usual diets. I still recommend that however much fat you eat, you try to choose the right kinds - monounsaturated fat found in olive oil, nuts and avocados, and omega-3-rich fat from cold water fish, flax (try freshly ground flaxseeds), and walnuts. Also choose low-glycemic carbohydrates and lean sources of protein.
As far as exercise is concerned, a study published in the May 25, 2005 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association found that it improved survival among women who have had breast cancer even if they walked as little as an hour a week. The authors noted that after a breast cancer diagnosis, women decrease their levels of physical activity by two hours a week and that even greater decreases have been seen among obese women.
The researchers found that the risk of death from breast cancer for women who have had breast cancer and walk at least an hour a week at a pace of two to 2.9 miles per hour was 20 percent lower than those who got less exercise or none at all. Those who walked three to five hours a week had a risk of death 50 percent lower than those who got little or no exercise. Those who got even more exercise also reduced their risk of death but, unaccountably, by somewhat less than 50 percent.
These findings make a lot of sense when you consider that physical activity affects circulating hormones. Lower estrogen levels among the physically active women might explain their improved survival, according to the study authors. (They noted that the benefit of physical activity was particularly apparent among women whose breast tumors were fed by estrogen.) Overall, the study makes a strong case for continuing to get regular exercise after a breast cancer diagnosis.
Andrew Weil, MD
Last Reviewed: June 2005
Provided by: DrWeil.com
Q: I'm a breast cancer survivor. I read that a low-fat diet reduces the risk of a recurrence. I was treated three years ago. Do you think that the diet can help me? What about exercise? -- Maureen A: A low-fat diet certainly couldn't hurt, and a new study shows that getting regular exercise can help a lot. The news that a low-fat diet reduces the rate of breast cancer recurrence comes from a study reported recently at a meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. It is the first study to demonstrate that diet directly affects breast cancer.
Of the 975 women who followed a low-fat diet, 96 (or 9.8 percent) had recurrences of their breast cancer over a five-year period compared to 181 (or 12.4 percent) of the 1,462 women who stayed on their usual diet. All of the women had undergone surgery (lumpectomy or mastectomy) followed by radiation and then hormonal therapy or chemotherapy when indicated. The women were assigned to the low-fat diet at random.
Although researchers said that more study is needed before recommending low- fat diets to all breast cancer patients, there is no reason not to cut your fat intake. Doing so will also reduce your risk of heart disease, and, if necessary, help you lose weight. (Simply losing weight after breast cancer treatment has been shown to reduce the risk of recurrence.) Interestingly, the women whose recurrence rate was lowest on the low-fat diet were those whose breast cancers were estrogen receptor negative, meaning that they didn't depend on estrogen to grow.
Researchers from the University of California at Los Angeles who conducted the low-fat diet study limited the women to an average of 33.3 grams of fat per day, a little more than one ounce of fat, compared to the 51.2 grams of fat per day consumed by the women who followed their usual diets. I still recommend that however much fat you eat, you try to choose the right kinds - monounsaturated fat found in olive oil, nuts and avocados, and omega-3-rich fat from cold water fish, flax (try freshly ground flaxseeds), and walnuts. Also choose low-glycemic carbohydrates and lean sources of protein.
As far as exercise is concerned, a study published in the May 25, 2005 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association found that it improved survival among women who have had breast cancer even if they walked as little as an hour a week. The authors noted that after a breast cancer diagnosis, women decrease their levels of physical activity by two hours a week and that even greater decreases have been seen among obese women.
The researchers found that the risk of death from breast cancer for women who have had breast cancer and walk at least an hour a week at a pace of two to 2.9 miles per hour was 20 percent lower than those who got less exercise or none at all. Those who walked three to five hours a week had a risk of death 50 percent lower than those who got little or no exercise. Those who got even more exercise also reduced their risk of death but, unaccountably, by somewhat less than 50 percent.
These findings make a lot of sense when you consider that physical activity affects circulating hormones. Lower estrogen levels among the physically active women might explain their improved survival, according to the study authors. (They noted that the benefit of physical activity was particularly apparent among women whose breast tumors were fed by estrogen.) Overall, the study makes a strong case for continuing to get regular exercise after a breast cancer diagnosis.
Andrew Weil, MD
Last Reviewed: June 2005
Is the Macrobiotic Diet Good for You?
Is the Macrobiotic Diet Good for You?
Provided by: DrWeil.com
Q: What is your opinion of the macrobiotic diet? I was on it about 20 years ago, lost weight, and felt absolutely wonderful. -- Jaime A: The macrobiotic diet, which originated in Japan, emphasizes whole grains (such as brown rice, barley, oats, corn, rye, wheat and buckwheat, which comprise 50 percent of the diet), seasonal vegetables, and, for protein, fish, soy foods and legumes with smaller amounts of sea vegetables, nuts, and seeds. It excludes all meats, eggs, cheese, sugar and sweets, most spices, coffee, alcohol, and most fruit.
You definitely can lose weight on a macrobiotic diet because it is low in fats, sugar and calories, and contains lots of fiber and complex carbohydrates. In general, it is a healthy way of eating, since it eliminates processed, highly refined foods, but claims that it can reverse cancer or strengthen the immune system have yet to be proved. An ongoing study sponsored by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine is investigating whether a macrobiotic diet works better than the American Heart Association diet (with or without added flaxseeds) in lowering the risks of heart disease, breast and endometrial cancers and osteoporosis among women between the ages of 50 and 72.
Despite its benefits, there are some drawbacks to the macrobiotic diet due to its limited food choices. It provides too much sodium, as does Japanese food in general, and its exclusion of most fruit deprives people of many beneficial phytonutrients. Eliminating all animal protein can lead to a deficiency of vitamin B12. Following a macrobiotic diet can also lead to deficiencies of protein, vitamin D, calcium, magnesium, iron and other B vitamins such as riboflavin. If you go macrobiotic, I would recommend taking a good multivitamin and mineral supplement.
A peculiarity of the diet is that it eliminates and labels "nightshade" vegetables - including tomatoes, potatoes, peppers and eggplants - as unhealthy. However, this is not the case. These foods are not at all dangerous except possibly to those who have allergies or sensitivities to one or more of them. A small percentage of people with arthritis are sensitive to nightshade vegetables and do better if they avoid them.
If you can live with the restrictions and manage to avoid the potential nutritional deficiencies, there's no reason not to follow a macrobiotic diet. However, I would recommend following this diet while under the supervision of a physician, who you can alert if you have any symptoms of fatigue, pain in muscles or joints, increased irritability or susceptibility to infections.
Andrew Weil, MD
Provided by: DrWeil.com
Q: What is your opinion of the macrobiotic diet? I was on it about 20 years ago, lost weight, and felt absolutely wonderful. -- Jaime A: The macrobiotic diet, which originated in Japan, emphasizes whole grains (such as brown rice, barley, oats, corn, rye, wheat and buckwheat, which comprise 50 percent of the diet), seasonal vegetables, and, for protein, fish, soy foods and legumes with smaller amounts of sea vegetables, nuts, and seeds. It excludes all meats, eggs, cheese, sugar and sweets, most spices, coffee, alcohol, and most fruit.
You definitely can lose weight on a macrobiotic diet because it is low in fats, sugar and calories, and contains lots of fiber and complex carbohydrates. In general, it is a healthy way of eating, since it eliminates processed, highly refined foods, but claims that it can reverse cancer or strengthen the immune system have yet to be proved. An ongoing study sponsored by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine is investigating whether a macrobiotic diet works better than the American Heart Association diet (with or without added flaxseeds) in lowering the risks of heart disease, breast and endometrial cancers and osteoporosis among women between the ages of 50 and 72.
Despite its benefits, there are some drawbacks to the macrobiotic diet due to its limited food choices. It provides too much sodium, as does Japanese food in general, and its exclusion of most fruit deprives people of many beneficial phytonutrients. Eliminating all animal protein can lead to a deficiency of vitamin B12. Following a macrobiotic diet can also lead to deficiencies of protein, vitamin D, calcium, magnesium, iron and other B vitamins such as riboflavin. If you go macrobiotic, I would recommend taking a good multivitamin and mineral supplement.
A peculiarity of the diet is that it eliminates and labels "nightshade" vegetables - including tomatoes, potatoes, peppers and eggplants - as unhealthy. However, this is not the case. These foods are not at all dangerous except possibly to those who have allergies or sensitivities to one or more of them. A small percentage of people with arthritis are sensitive to nightshade vegetables and do better if they avoid them.
If you can live with the restrictions and manage to avoid the potential nutritional deficiencies, there's no reason not to follow a macrobiotic diet. However, I would recommend following this diet while under the supervision of a physician, who you can alert if you have any symptoms of fatigue, pain in muscles or joints, increased irritability or susceptibility to infections.
Andrew Weil, MD
Friday, March 31, 2006
Online Support Eases Breast Cancer Stress
THURSDAY, March 30 (HealthDay News) -- Women struggling with breast cancer can benefit greatly from online support groups, new research suggests.
These groups provide emotional benefits for breast cancer patients who can openly express their feelings in ways that help them make sense of their cancer experience, report researchers at the Center of Excellence in Cancer Communications Research, part of the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
"Even though there are many women with breast cancer participating in online support groups, this is among the first research studies to demonstrate measurable benefits from participation in such groups," study lead author Bret Shaw said in a prepared statement.
The researchers used a computer program to analyze text messages written by 66 breast cancer patients taking part in an online support group. The program measured the percentage of words that were suggestive of learning or understanding, such as aware, feels, know, realize, see, think, and understand.
The study found that higher use of these kinds of words in the women's text messages was associated with improved emotional well-being and reduced negative mood in follow-up surveys.
"Computer support groups are often conceived of as places where people exchange information, emotional support and encouragement, but it's interesting that another possible benefit appears to come just from having the opportunity to talk openly and constructively about living with breast cancer independent of actual support they receive from others," Shaw said.
The study appears in the March issue of the journal Health Communication.
More information
The American Cancer Society offers tips for coping with breast cancer.
and at: www.dreddyclinic.com
These groups provide emotional benefits for breast cancer patients who can openly express their feelings in ways that help them make sense of their cancer experience, report researchers at the Center of Excellence in Cancer Communications Research, part of the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
"Even though there are many women with breast cancer participating in online support groups, this is among the first research studies to demonstrate measurable benefits from participation in such groups," study lead author Bret Shaw said in a prepared statement.
The researchers used a computer program to analyze text messages written by 66 breast cancer patients taking part in an online support group. The program measured the percentage of words that were suggestive of learning or understanding, such as aware, feels, know, realize, see, think, and understand.
The study found that higher use of these kinds of words in the women's text messages was associated with improved emotional well-being and reduced negative mood in follow-up surveys.
"Computer support groups are often conceived of as places where people exchange information, emotional support and encouragement, but it's interesting that another possible benefit appears to come just from having the opportunity to talk openly and constructively about living with breast cancer independent of actual support they receive from others," Shaw said.
The study appears in the March issue of the journal Health Communication.
More information
The American Cancer Society offers tips for coping with breast cancer.
and at: www.dreddyclinic.com
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
American Cancer Society Now Believes Obesity Is As Dangerous As Smoking
The risk of cancer from being obese is similar to the risk of cancer from using tobacco, according to the American Cancer Society, and experts suggest that obesity may soon surpass smoking as the leading cause of preventable deaths.
Being overweight or obese is associated with a higher risk of several types of cancer, including colon and breast cancer, and evidence suggests that being physically active can reduce cancer risks, especially for colon and breast cancer.
One-third of cancer deaths are related to diet and inactivity, and experts believe that about 186,000 lives could be saved each year if people made lifestyle changes.
To spur such changes, the society will launch the Great American Weigh In, similar to the Great American Smokeout, which began about three decades ago and encouraged people to quit smoking.
The Weigh In aims to establish a link between fat and cancer in the minds of the public, as a recent survey found that only one percent of participants knew that maintaining a healthy weight would also keep cancer risk down.
The program asks people to gauge whether they are overweight or obese by measuring their body mass index (BMI), a measurement of obesity involving height and weight.
Women will be a primary target for the society since they typically make decisions on what to feed the family and are also more likely than men to make lifestyle changes. The link between weight and breast cancer, which is the most feared disease among women, will also be a major motivator for women to maintain healthy weights, according to the society.
The Weigh In’s simplistic goal, measuring BMI, may trigger people to take other healthy steps. However, the program’s simple goal has been criticized by some who say a next step, such as a 30-minute walk each day, should be suggested. Other strategies include using law, as is the case with smoking (for example people cannot smoke inside many buildings). One suggestion for food would be to reduce prices of healthier food and raise taxes on higher fat ones.
Yahoo News February 17, 2003
more info at:
http://www.dreddyclinic.com/findinformation/cc/skincancer.htm
Being overweight or obese is associated with a higher risk of several types of cancer, including colon and breast cancer, and evidence suggests that being physically active can reduce cancer risks, especially for colon and breast cancer.
One-third of cancer deaths are related to diet and inactivity, and experts believe that about 186,000 lives could be saved each year if people made lifestyle changes.
To spur such changes, the society will launch the Great American Weigh In, similar to the Great American Smokeout, which began about three decades ago and encouraged people to quit smoking.
The Weigh In aims to establish a link between fat and cancer in the minds of the public, as a recent survey found that only one percent of participants knew that maintaining a healthy weight would also keep cancer risk down.
The program asks people to gauge whether they are overweight or obese by measuring their body mass index (BMI), a measurement of obesity involving height and weight.
Women will be a primary target for the society since they typically make decisions on what to feed the family and are also more likely than men to make lifestyle changes. The link between weight and breast cancer, which is the most feared disease among women, will also be a major motivator for women to maintain healthy weights, according to the society.
The Weigh In’s simplistic goal, measuring BMI, may trigger people to take other healthy steps. However, the program’s simple goal has been criticized by some who say a next step, such as a 30-minute walk each day, should be suggested. Other strategies include using law, as is the case with smoking (for example people cannot smoke inside many buildings). One suggestion for food would be to reduce prices of healthier food and raise taxes on higher fat ones.
Yahoo News February 17, 2003
more info at:
http://www.dreddyclinic.com/findinformation/cc/skincancer.htm
Better Habits Could Slash U.S. Cancer, Report Says
by Maggie Fox
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - If people would quit smoking, eat more healthily and exercise, cancer deaths could be cut by nearly a third, a report issued on Monday said.
Lifestyle changes and better screening could prevent almost 100,000 new cancer cases and 60,000 cancer deaths each year, the report from the Institute of Medicine said.
It said the biggest cuts would come in lung cancer, the No. 1 cancer killer in the United States and many other countries, and colon cancer, the No. 3 killer.
"What's new here is the growing body of evidence confirming that interventions that get people to change their behaviors do work," Susan Curry of the University of Illinois at Chicago, who helped write the report, said in a statement.
The American Cancer Society says nearly 1.3 million Americans were diagnosed with cancer and 500,000 died from cancer in 2002. Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the United States, after heart disease.
Curry noted it is very difficult to make the changes needed to lower cancer rates. The American Cancer Society and other groups focused on cancer prevention recommend a diet based on plant foods such as fruits and vegetables and whole grains, which many Americans are reluctant to adopt.
Colon cancer, for example, which kills 57,000 Americans a year, is linked to a diet rich in fat and red meat, as well as to smoking. Colonoscopies and other methods of cancer screening can catch colon cancer early, while it is still easy to cure.
Quitting smoking could prevent virtually all cases of lung cancer, which was a relatively uncommon disease before cigarettes became popular. Deaths among men from lung cancer have dropped markedly, although rates among women, who started smoking more in recent decades, are still rising.
"Although personal experience illustrates for most people the great difficulty of achieving sustained behavioral change, Americans have made substantial improvements in their health habits in the past few decades," the report said.
The institute, which advises the federal government on health issues such as vitamin intake and health insurance, recommends stricter enforcement of tobacco laws--especially sales on the Internet, where minors can easily obtain products.
Taxes on tobacco are "the single most effective method for reducing the demand for tobacco," the report said.
Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson earlier this month rejected an HHS committee's recommendation to raise federal cigarette taxes by $2 a pack to discourage smoking and fund stop-smoking programs.
The report also recommended that insurers--including Medicare and Medicaid--pay for cancer prevention and detection services that have been shown to work, such as nicotine replacement therapy, breast cancer screening for women age 50 and older, cervical cancer screening for all sexually active women and colon cancer screening.
more info at:
http://www.dreddyclinic.com/findinformation/cc/skincancer.htm
Fitness May Prevent Cancer Deaths
Results of a 25-year study found that men who were most in shape at the beginning of the study were less likely to die from cancer, while women who started the study overweight had a greater risk of dying from cancer.
The study, which included 2,585 women and 2,890 men, examined the relationship between fitness and obesity and the risk of dying from all types of cancer. Participants were followed from the 1970s to 1998.
A treadmill test was given at the beginning of the study to measure heart health and body mass index (BMI), a measure used to gauge obesity, was measured.
Among men, the fittest were about half as likely to die from cancer as the less fit men. Among women, fitness levels did not have a significant effect on cancer deaths, but a woman’s BMI at the start of the study did. Women with the highest BMIs were close to 50 percent more likely to die from cancer than women with lower BMIs.
It is thought that physical activity reduce cancer risk by influencing certain hormone and growth factor levels, decreasing body fat and possibly boosting the immune system.
Future studies may examine the relationship of fitness and obesity on certain types of cancers, such as breast cancer.
more info at:
http://www.dreddyclinic.com/findinformation/cc/skincancer.htm
The study, which included 2,585 women and 2,890 men, examined the relationship between fitness and obesity and the risk of dying from all types of cancer. Participants were followed from the 1970s to 1998.
A treadmill test was given at the beginning of the study to measure heart health and body mass index (BMI), a measure used to gauge obesity, was measured.
Among men, the fittest were about half as likely to die from cancer as the less fit men. Among women, fitness levels did not have a significant effect on cancer deaths, but a woman’s BMI at the start of the study did. Women with the highest BMIs were close to 50 percent more likely to die from cancer than women with lower BMIs.
It is thought that physical activity reduce cancer risk by influencing certain hormone and growth factor levels, decreasing body fat and possibly boosting the immune system.
Future studies may examine the relationship of fitness and obesity on certain types of cancers, such as breast cancer.
more info at:
http://www.dreddyclinic.com/findinformation/cc/skincancer.htm
Cancer Cookbook: Making It Nutritious & Delicious
© Patrick Quillin Ph.D., R.D.
(Excerpted from Beating Cancer with Nutrition: Clinically Proven and Easy-To-Follow Strategies to Dramatically Improve Your Quality and Quantity of Life)
"Let your food be your medicine and your medicine be your food."Hippocrates, father of modern medicine, circa 400 B.C.
Nutrition and health. It makes so much sense: "You are what you eat." Veterinarians know the irreplacable link between nutrient intake and health. Actually, most of our pets eat better than most Americans. Your dog or cat probably gets a balanced formula of protein, carbohydrate, fat, fiber, vitamins and minerals. Yet, most of us eat for taste, cost, and convenience. The most commonly eaten food in America is heavily refined and nutritionally bankrupt white flour.
Meanwhile, our livestock eat the more nutritious wheat germ and bran that we discard. When our crops are not doing well, we examine the soil for nutrients, fluid and pH content. Our gardens prosper when we water, fertilize, and add a little broad spectrum mineral supplement, such as Miracle Gro.
A sign posted near the junk food vending machines in a major city zoo warns: "Do not feed this food to the animals or they may get sick and die." Think about it. The food that might kill a 400 pound ape is okay for a 40 pound child who is biologically very similar? If our gardens, field crops, pets, exotic zoo creatures and every other form of life on earth are all heavily dependent on their diet for health, then what makes us think that humans have transcended this dependence?
FoodFood is a rich tapestry of various chemicals. For some advanced cancer patients, TPN is often the only route which can provide adequate nutrient intake. However, for other patients, food can be an integral part of their recovery.
Food contains anti-cancer agents that we are only beginning to understand. One third of all prescription drugs in America originated as plant products. It is food that provides macronutrients, like carbohydrate, fat and protein, that drive extremely influential hormones and prostaglandins in your body. It is food that establishes your pH balance and electrolyte "soup" that bathes every cell in your body. While supplements are valuable, they cannot replace the fundamental importance of a wholesome diet.
This chapter can make or break your cancer-fighting program. The food discussed in this chapter has been fine tuned over the years to be tasty, nutritious, inexpensive and easy to prepare. Our eating habits are all acquired. We base our current diet on what mother cooked when we were younger; what our society, ethnic and religious groups prefer; what is advertised in print and electronic media, and what is available in the local grocery store. People in the Phillipines or the Amazon are born with structurally identical taste buds to Americans, yet they eat entirely different foods.
It takes about 3 weeks to acquire new eating habits. Try this program for 3 weeks, at which time it will become easier to stay with and you may just find that the nutrient-depleted junk food of yesterday really doesn't satisfy your taste buds like the following whole foods outlined by Noreen Quillin.
True ConfessionsPatrick Quillin has not always eaten as he does now. I now talk the talk and walk the walk. But I was raised in middle America, with roast beef, potatoes and gravy every Sunday afternoon; Captain Crunch for breakfast and a soda pop if you were good. White bread and bologna were the standard fare at home.
My parents provided what they felt were lavish and well balanced meals to the best of their knowledge, as millions of other American families.As I began studying nutrition in college, my eating habits improved, but were still far from enviable. I remember one semester in college while taking 19 units, 3 labs and working part time, I had no spare time to cook or even eat, so I kept a large box of Twinkies in the back of my van to provide "sustenance" when needed. For many months those Twinkies baked in the hot southern California sun and were always as fresh as the day they were bought.
I began to question the shelf life of this food: "If bacteria is not interested in this food, then what makes me think that my body cells are interested in it!"
At that point in my life, my lovely and talented wife Noreen began exploring alternative cooking styles. While I was studying the lofty sciences of nutritional biochemistry, Noreen was busy making nutritious taste delicious. It was a true turning point in my life. I started eating properly, felt better, got fewer colds, and could sincerely lecture on the subject to others.
Noreen got books on everything that you can do with soybeans, crockpots, pressure cookers, whole grains and vegetarian lifestyles. She bravely and diligently tried everything. We sometimes would come home with bags of food from some ethnic grocery store that we later had to re-identify in order to try some recipe. Some of it was good. Some was edible. Some we had to throw out. But we learned. And for the past 3 years, Noreen has taught cooking classes to our cancer patients. And we have all learned. What you have in this chapter is a time-tested approach to making your anti-cancer diet practical and tasty. Bon appetit!
Synegistic Forces in FoodsAlthough 1000 mg. daily of vitamin C has been shown to reduce the risk for stomach cancer, a small glass of orange juice containing only 37 mg of vitamin C is twice as likely to lower the chances for stomach cancer. Something in oranges is even more chemo-protective than vitamin C.
Although most people only absorb 20-50% of their ingested calcium, the remaining calcium binds up potentially damaging fats in the intestines to provide protection against colon cancer.In 1963, a major "player" in the American drug business, Merck, tried to patent a single antibiotic substance that was originally isolated from yogurt. But this substance did not work alone. Since then, researchers have found no less than 7 natural antibiotics that all contribute to yogurt's unique ability to protect the body from infections.
There are many anti-cancer agents in plant food, including beta-carotene, chlorophyll, over 500 mixed carotenoids, over 600 various bioflavonoids, lutein, lycopenes and canthaxanthin. The point is: we can isolate and concentrate certain factors in foods for use as therapeutic supplements in cancer therapy, but we must always rely heavily on the mysterious and elegant symphony of ingredients found in wholesome food.
How do Foods Protect Us From Toxins and Cancer?
By spurring on the body to produce more toxin scavengers, like glutathione peroxidase from indoles in cabbage.
By bolstering the immune system. Once the external therapies of chemo, radiation and surgery have eliminated the visible tumor, then the real and final cancer battle is totally dependent on the immune factors. Many foods and individual nutrients are influential here.
By stimulating certain detoxifying enzyme systems, like the liver's cytochrome P450.1 Selenium, vitamin C and milk thistle help here.
By shutting down the oncogene in human cells, that acts like a traitor to participate in cancer growth. Soybeans, vitamin A and D help here.
By directly killing tumor cells. The bioflavonoid quercetin, vitamin C, B-12, K, and garlic help here.
By directly killing bacteria or viruses that may cause cancer.
By binding up substances, like bile acids, that can decay into a carcinogenic substance. Fiber is a champion here.
By caging carcinogenic heavy metals, in a process called chelation (say 'key-lay-shun'), and carrying these toxic minerals out of the body. Bioflavonoids, vitamin C and garlic help this way.
By attaching to fats, to stop the carcinogenic fat "rusting" process. Calcium, vitamin E and fiber use this method.
By providing the known essential and unknown important nutrients that the body needs to better defend itself against pollutants.2 A well-nourished body is better able to detoxify, neutralize and excrete the ubiquitous poisons of the 20th century.
Using Guidelines That are UniversalThere have been a number of diets developed for the cancer patient: Drs. Moerman3, Livingston4, Gerson5, and the macrobiotic6 diets to mention a few. Each of these visionaries was a physician who spent at least several decades ministering to cancer patients.
While there are some differences in these diets, there is also some common ground. Peculariarities about each program include:
Dr. Moerman recommends supplements of iron for cancer patients, yet other data shows that elemental iron may accelerate cancer growth. He allows the yolk of the egg, but not the white part.Macrobiotics allow liberal amounts of soy sauce and pickles, yet restrict intake of fruit and fish.
Dr. Gerson used to encourage raw pureed calf's liver, which can contain a number of dangerous bacteria.
Dr. Livingston prohibits any chicken intake, since a cancer-causing organism thrives in chicken.
The points just mentioned are the oddities about each program which lack a good explanation. Yet, we don't want to throw out the "baby with the bath water". Each of these programs embraces a common thread, which includes a number of explanable nutrition principles. They all provide a diet that:
uses only unprocessed foods, nothing in a package with a label
uses high amounts of fresh vegetables
employs a low fat diet
emphasizes the importance of regularity
uses little or no dairy products, with yogurt as the preferred dairy selection
stabilizes blood sugar levels with no sweets and never eat something sweet by itself
increases potassium and reduces sodium intake
SuperfoodsThough there are many nourishing foods, there are only a few superfoods that contain such a potent collection of protective factors that they deserve regular inclusion in most diets.
Yogurt. While dairy products are the world's most common allergenic food, for 1/2 to 2/3 of the population, yogurt can provide some dramatic immune stimulation. On the surface, yogurt appears to be nothing more than a fermented dairy product. Yet, modern scientists find that the active culture of bacteria in yogurt (Lactobacillus) can fortify the immune system. Yogurt is an impressive immune stimulant.7 In both humans and animals, yogurt in the diet tripled the internal production of interferon (a powerful weapon of the immune system against tumor cells) while also raising the level of natural killer cells. Yogurt has been shown to slow down the growth of tumor cells in the GI tract while improving the ability of the immune system to destroy active tumor cells.8 Yogurt can block the production of carcinogenic agents in the colon. When scientists looked at the diet of 1010 women with breast cancer and compared them to an equally matched group without breast cancer, they found an inverse dose-dependent relationship: the more yogurt consumed, the lower the risk for breast cancer.9In several European studies, yogurt in animal studies was able to reverse tumor progress. A 1962 study found that 59 percent of 258 mice implanted with sarcoma cells were cured through yogurt. A more recent American study found a 30 percent cure rate through yogurt.10 While it is doubtful that yogurt is going to cure advanced human cancer, it is likely that yogurt can better fortify the cancer patient's immune system.Garlic. This stinky little vegetable has been used for 5000 years in various healing formulas. Pasteur noted that garlic killed all of the bacteria in his petri dishes. More importantly, garlic has been found to stimulate natural protection against tumor cells. Tarig Abdullah, MD of Florida found that white blood cells from garlic-fed people were able to kill 139% more tumor cells than white cells from non-garlic eaters.11 Garlic and onions fed to lab animals helped to decrease the number of skin tumors.12 Researchers found that onions provided major protection against expected tumors from DMBA in test animals.13 Mice with a genetic weakness toward cancer were fed raw garlic with a lower-than-expected tumor incidence.14
The most common form of cancer worldwide is stomach cancer. Chinese researchers find that a high intake of garlic and onions cuts the risk for stomach cancer in half.15 Garlic provides the liver with a certain amount of protection against carcinogenic chemicals. Scientists find that garlic is deadly to invading pathogens or tumor cells, but is harmless to normal healthy body cells; thus offering the hope of the truly selective toxin against cancer that is being sought worldwide.
Carotenoids. Green plants create sugars by capturing the sun's energy in a process called photosynthesis. The electrons that must be corralled in this process can be highly destructive. Hence, nature has evolved an impressive system of free radical protectors, including carotenoids and bioflavonoids, that act like the lead lining in a nuclear reactor to absorb dangerous unpaired electrons. Both of these substances have potential in stimulating the immune system while there is preliminary evidence that carotenoids may be directly toxic to tumor cells.Carotenoids are found in green and orange fruits and vegetables. Bioflavonoids are found in citrus, whole grains, honey, and other plant foods.Cruciferous vegetables. Broccoli, brussel sprouts, cabbage, and cauliflower were involved in the "ground floor" discovery that nutrition is linked to cancer. Lee Wattenberg, PhD of the University of Minnesota found in the 1970s that animals fed cruciferous vegetables had markedly lower cancer rates than matched controls. Since then, the active ingredient "indoles" have been isolated from cruciferous vegetables and found to be very protective against cancer. Scientists at Johns Hopkins University found that lab animals fed cruciferous vegetables and then exposed to the deadly carcinogen aflatoxin had a 90 percent reduction in their cancer rate.16Cruciferous vegetables are able to increase the body's production of glutathione peroxidase, which is one of the more important protective enzyme systems in the body.Mushrooms. Gourmet chefs have long prized various mushrooms for their subtle and exotic flavors. Now there is an abundance of scientific evidence showing that Rei-shi, Shiitake, and Maitake mushrooms are potent anti-cancer foods.17 Actually, Maitake literally means "dancing mushroom" since people would dance with joy when finding these delicate mushrooms on a country hillside. Oral extract of Maitake provided complete elimination of tumors in 40% of animals tested, while the remaining 60% of animals had a 90% elimination of tumors. Maitake contains a polysaccharide, called beta-glucan, which stimulates the immune system and even lowers blood pressure.Legumes. Seed foods (like soybeans) have a substance that can partially protect the seed from digestion, called protease inhibitors (PI). For many years, these substances were thought to be harmful. New evidence finds that PIs may squelch tumor growth.18 Researchers at the National Cancer Institute find a collection of substances in soybeans, including isoflavones and phytoestrogens, appear to have potent anti-cancer properties.19 Dr. Ann Kennedy has spent 20 years researching a compound in soybeans that:
prevents cancer in most animals exposed to a variety of carcinogens
retards cancer in some studies
lowers the toxic side effects of chemo and radiation therapy
reverts a cancer cell back to a normal healthy cell.20
Others. There are numerous foods that show an ability to slow tumor growth in some way. Apples, apricots, barley, citrus fruit, cranberries, fiber, figs, fish oil, fish, ginger, green tea, spinach, seaweed and other foods are among the reasons that I heavily favor the use of a mixed highly nutritious diet as the foundation for nutrition in cancer therapy
Food treats malnutrition. Food contains known essential nutrients that stimulate the immune system and provide valuable protection against carcinogens. Foods also contain poorly understood factors that may add measurably to the recovery of the cancer patient. Many foods have tremendous therapeutic value in helping the patient to internally fight cancer.
How to Use this SectionThis cookbook chapter was written with the cancer patient in mind and can also be helpful to people who want to eat properly but have little time to spend in the kitchen. Remember: the more wellness you have, the less illness you can have. One full week of menus is vegetarian style with no dairy products, but eggs are allowed. Another week's menu includes low fat poultry and fish. This will show you how to prepare meals that can be tasty and nutritious. The recipes are just a guide to show you the possibilities in creative cooking.
There is a section of tips to stimulate the appetite or lose weight rationally. Also included is the concept of bulk cooking, which is a great way to have a freezer full of ready-made meals at 1/4 the cost. "Fast food" at our house usually means microwaving some frozen beans, adding leftover bits of chicken or fish, and rolling this tasty collection into whole wheat tortillas with fresh salsa. The seasonings of Spike and Gayelords powdered vegetable broth may be purchased at your local heath food store.
Realize that there is no one perfect diet. Laying out a weekly menu of "nutritious" food is frought with peril, since another nutritionist could have their own valid criticisms of this program. Life is not perfect, nor are our eating habits. The most nourishing meal in the world is useless unless eaten. This chapter demonstrates healthy eating habits within the context of practical and tasty recipes. There are some noteworthy spartan cancer diets that only an extremely dedicated cancer patient can follow.
Given the choice between an unpalatable and labor-intensive eating program or returning to their old destructive eating habits, many cancer patients chose the later. Gleaning from dozens of good cookbooks and years of experience, the menus provided in this chapter make precious few compromises in nutritional quality while emphasizing taste, cost and practical preparation.
To Gain WeightDon't drink fluids or have soup or salad before the meal. It will fill you up on foods that are low in calorie density.
Eat on a large plate, thus avoiding food portions that appear overwhelming. Have small portions, knowing you can always have more.
People eat more when dining in groups than by themselves. Go to buffets. Eat with friends or other patients if possible. At our hospital, we were constantly battling the problem of patients not wanting to eat, no matter how appetizing the food looked and smelled. One Fourth of July, we set up a family picnic, with broiled chicken, baked beans, watermelon, corn on the cob and more. People who had not eaten well all week suddenly developed a ferocious appetite. We have been serving buffet family style meals ever since.
Distract your mind. Rent a good video and have your meal in front of the TV. Have you ever sat down with a bowl of popcorn and realized you had eaten the whole batch and didn't even realize it?
To Lose WeightEat 6 times a day. That doesn't mean 6 Big Macs. It means a light breakfast upon rising; a piece of fruit later in the midmorning; a salad and half a sandwich at lunch; and the other 1/2 of the sandwich at mid-afternoon. Even if you over-indulge at one meal, make sure you eat on schedule. This concept, called periodicity, trains the mind and body that food is constantly coming into the system and there is no need to overindulge or become exceedingly efficient at storing calories.
Have warm fluids, like tea or soup, about 20 minutes before mealtime.
Use a smaller plate. It gives the illusion that you're eating more.
Drink plenty of purified water. It's good for both weight loss, constipation and wrinkles.
Adjust your bathroom scale to the exact weight you want to be. As you lose weight, you can readjust it closer to the zero, but always see your weight as you want it to be. This way when you think about having that huge piece of cake, you will think to yourself, "A person of my weight won't eat that."
Exercise within your own ability. Make sure you enjoy it.
Eat more high-fiber foods, such as fruits, vegetables, beans and whole-grain cereals.
Plan your meals and snacks instead of waiting until you are hungry.
Dining Tips For The Cancer PatientYou eat with your eyes first, so make sure that your plate looks appetizing. Have different colors. No matter how tasty the food might be, if it is all the same color (i.e. turkey, mash potatoes, and cauliflower), then you won't enjoy the meal as much.
Crock pot cooking is a great idea. It is a relatively inexpensive kitchen tool which cures the 5 o'clock dilemma of haphazard meal preparation. There are many advantages to making your dinner in the morning. You prepare the food early which means that the kitchen will be clean and the urge to order out at 5 pm has been eliminated. Also, the aromas of cooking food wafting throughout the house can help stimulate a sagging appetite.
Cook up more food than is needed. Freeze leftovers in baggies in individual servings. This way you will have a freezer full of ready-to-eat nutritious meals.
Pressure cooking is wonderful. Your cooking time for whole grains and beans will be cut by 75%.
Instead of soda pop, try diluted apple juice or ginger tea with 1/4 tsp of vitamin C per cup.
Ginger helps to relieve nausea. You can take tablets, or drink ginger tea cold or hot.
Acupressure wrist bands, available at your pharmacy or health food store, also help to relieve nausea.
Avoid frying foods. Make sure that you have foods like carrot sticks or baked whole wheat tortilla chips to satisfy that need for crunchy food.Eating OutIceberg lettuce is the most common salad bar offering, but is "junk food" relative to most other vegetables. Skip the iceberg lettuce and enjoy the healthier fruits, vegetables and whole-grain foods from the salad bar. A good rule of thumb: the deeper the color of the vegetable, the more nourishing it is. Dark greens are better than pale greens, dark orange squash is better than pale squash, and so on. In nature, cauliflower is a dark green vegetable, until human intervention ties the leaves around the developing flower to deprive it of sunlight.
Many restaurants offer low-calorie or light meals with gourmet versions.
Instead of accepting that "fried" meal from a restaurant menu, most places will steam or broil your food.
Airlines can be very accommodating in having a special meal ready for you. Give them at least 1 week advance notice.
Ask for the salad dressing to be served on the side.
Have the rich sauces or gravies left out.
Avoid sauteed and deep-fried food.
Foods to Highlight in Your DietYogurtSproutsOnionsGarlicGingerCabbage, broccoli, Brussel sprouts, cauliflowerCarrotsCoybeans, garbanzo beans and other legumesRice, barley and other whole grainsSea vegetables, a.k.a. seaweedDark green and dark orange fruits & vegetablesApples, berriesEggsFigsFishHoney
Beverages to HighlightPurified waterCafixRomaHerb teaVitamin C powder & honey in hot waterGinger teaHot natural apple juice with vitamin CFresh orange juicePostumChickoryJapanese Green teaRoasted rice or barley teaVinegar, honey & water
Dragon-Slayer Shake
I hate taking pills, even when I know the value of using supplements to improve my health. That's why I developed this "shake". While most of us are familiar with milkshakes, there are many variations on that theme which can provide nutrient-dense foods in a convenient format. I have found that many cancer patients would avoid taking their supplements of vitamins, minerals and botanicals because they didn't like swallowing pills. To solve that problem, I have developed this shake, which can incorporate many nutrients in powder form, thus eliminating taking pills at all, and the remaining pills are easier to swallow with the lubricating ability of this smooth shake.
Shakes can be a quick and easy breakfast. Depending on your calorie requirements, use this shake in addition to or instead of the breakfast suggestions listed later. My typical breakfast consists of this Dragon-Slayer shake, whole grain rolls, bagles, muffins or Pita bread, along with a large serving of fresh fruit in season.
Take up to half of your pills with the "Dragon-Slayer shake" and save the remaining pills for later in the day. Taking supplements in small divided dosages helps to maintain sustained levels of nutrients in the bloodstream.
Ingredients:4-8 ounces of dilute fruit juice, including apple, cranberry, orange, fresh squeezed, juice extracted, etc. I add twice the specified water to a can of frozen unsweetened concentrated apple juice from your grocery store.
10-15 grams of powdered protein from (listed in order of preference): whey, rice, soy, alfalfa, egg white, non-fat yogurt solids, spirulina. Do not use powdered proteins that are based upon non-fat milk solids. Too many people are allergic to this product. Your health food store should have a dozen different products to select from. ProMod is a name brand pure whey protein product.
1/2 tablespoon of Perfect 7. This is an excellent product to maintain regularity and encourage proper detoxification. It includes fiber, an herbal laxative, proper bacteria for colonizing the intestines and botanicals for detoxification. You may be surprised at the fecal matter eliminated in the first few weeks on this program.
One sliced ripe banana or less, depending on how thick you like your shakes. Banana adds texture via pectin to make this shake have true milk shake viscosity.
2-4 grams of buffered vitamin C powder from Emergen-C or Seraphim. Both products have an effervescent action that brings a "soda pop" like flavor to this drink, along with high doses of vitamin C that won't upset even the most delicate stomach.
1 tablespoon of OmegaSyn 1 fatty acids (a blend of EPA and GLA) from BioSyn (800-346-2703)
1/2 tablespoon of pure, cold pressed flaxseed oil (optional)
1/2 tablespoon of wheat germ oil (optional)
For those who need to slow down weight loss or gain weight, add 2 tablespoons of MCT (medium chain triglyceride) oil
Directions:Use a large blender or a small hand held blender, like the ones originally developed to mix diet drinks. First add the oils (EPA, wheat germ and flax) to coat the bottom of the container for easy mixing and cleaning. Add the powdered ingredients and cut up fruit next. Blend until smooth, or about 15 seconds.
Bulk Cooking
YogurtScald (foaming but not yet at boiling) 8 cups of milk with one cup of added powdered milk.
Turn heat down and simmer for at least 5 minutes; the longer you simmer (up to 25 minutes) the thicker your yogurt will be.
While the milk is simmering, place 2 tablespoons of live cultured good-tasting yogurt in each of two quart-glass peanut butter jars and stir briefly with a plastic spoon until creamy.
After simmering milk, let the temperature drop to 49 degrees C. (112 F.). You don't want to kill the yogurt bacteria with milk that is too hot.
Add about a half cup of the warm milk to the yogurt starter in each of two jars and stir gently but thoroughly. Then add the rest of the milk to the glass jars.
Place the jars (uncovered) in a picnic thermos (the size that holds a six pack of beer). Close the thermos lid and leave for 6-10 hours. The longer it sits, the thicker it gets. Do not open container and peek while the fermentation is occurring.
This recipe allows you to cut the cost of yogurt from $14.00 per gallon to $2.10 per gallon (cost of milk).
Growing Your Own SproutsYou will need a glass jar (quart size or larger), a soft plastic screen for the top, and a rubber band to hold the screen in place. There are also commercial sprouting kits available in most health food stores. Place about one heaping tablespoon of seeds in your glass container with the screen doubled on the top. The seeds will expand about tenfold as they sprout, so allow enough room for their expansion. Fill the container half full of purified water and let stand overnight. Next morning drain and rinse the seeds. Let stand inverted over the sink for proper drainage. Rinse and drain twice each day for the next 6-7 days. Keep the jar in a dimly lit area.
Larger seeds, like peas, beans, and lentils take a shorter time to grow and should not be allowed to grow more than a half inch long, since they will develop a bitter flavor. Mung bean sprouts can get up to two inches in length without bitter flavor. Wheat, barley, oats, and other grass plants make terrific sprouts. Smaller seeds, like alfalfa, can grow to an inch in length without any bitter flavor. For some extra vitamin A, let the alfalfa sprouts sit in a sunny window for the last day before eating. The green color indicates the welcome addition of chlorophyll, folacin and beta-carotene.
In excess quantities, sprouts may blunt the immune system in humans. Do not eat more than two cups of sprouts daily.
Homemade Mayonnaise
1 egg1 tsp. prepared mustard1/2 tsp. salt3 tbs apple cider1 cup sunflower or canola oil
Put the egg, mustard, salt, and 1/2 cup of the oil in the container of an electric blender or food processor. Blend until smooth. Continue blending or processing while adding the remaining oil very slowly in a steady stream into the center of the egg mixture. Use a small rubber spatula to scrape the mayonnaise into a jar. Store covered in the refrigerator. Yields about 2 cups.
Note: If the mayonnaise curdles, blend or process 1 egg in the container of a clean electric blender or food processor and gradually pour the curdled mayonnaise back in while blending or processing at high speed.
Spicy Beans
3 cups of pinto beans1 large onion cut up3-4 garlic cloves minced2-3 dry red peppers cut up fine1 tablespoon chili powder1 tsp cumin powder1/3 cup olive oilLite salt
Sort and wash beans in a colander. Soak the beans overnight in about 8 cups of water in a heavy saucepan. Drain, then fill with another 8 cups of clean water. Add rest of the ingredients. Cover and simmer for 90-120 minutes or until beans are tender. Blend with an egg beater. Add a bit of salt to taste.
If you need the beans sooner:Rinse beans. Then fill pot with beans and 8 cups of water Allow to boil for 2 minutes. Let sit in a covered pot for 1 hour. Proceed to next step.
(For best results, use a pressure cooker)Place the soaked and rinsed beans in 5 cups of water in pot. Add ingredients. Bring lid weight to a gentle rocking motion, then pressure cook for 25 minutes. Let cool down. Beat with a mixer to desired consistency.
Barley
Rinse barley and cook for 35-45 minutes in a large volume of boiling water. Barley increases its bulk by four fold when cooked. Drain excess water. Store extra barley in baggies and place in freezer for later use. Season the barley with spices that go with the entree. Spike, Mrs. Dash and other herbal seasonings go with anything.
If using a pressure cooker, use twice the amount of barley measurement for the water. Bring to a rock, then immediately remove from stove burner. Follow rest of the directions.
Better Butter
Blend equal parts of olive oil and softened butter.
Whole Wheat Piecrust
1 cup whole wheat pastry flour1/2 teaspoon salt3 tablespoons oil1/4 cup water
Stir dry ingredients together. Mix in oil. Add enough of the water to make the dough form a ball. Roll flat between sheets of waxed paper and lift into pan. Make edge.
Roasted Brown Rice or Barley Tea
Dry roast uncooked grain over medium flame for 10 minutes or until a fragrant aroma develops. Stir and shake pan occasionally. Add 2 to 3 tablespoons of the grain to 1 1/2 quarts of purified water. Bring to a boil, simmer 10 to 15 minutes.
The following recipes are not carved in stone. If you do not like a certain spice or seasoning, leave it out. Also, some days you might feel like cooking more than others. These menus were based more on giving maximum variety with different foods than offering no-effort cooking. Feel free to mix the ideas to your pleasure.Also, it is a good idea to have leftovers to freeze in serving sizes so you can just pull out easy-to-serve dinners on days you want to relax.
more info at:
http://www.dreddyclinic.com/findinformation/cc/skincancer.htm
(Excerpted from Beating Cancer with Nutrition: Clinically Proven and Easy-To-Follow Strategies to Dramatically Improve Your Quality and Quantity of Life)
"Let your food be your medicine and your medicine be your food."Hippocrates, father of modern medicine, circa 400 B.C.
Nutrition and health. It makes so much sense: "You are what you eat." Veterinarians know the irreplacable link between nutrient intake and health. Actually, most of our pets eat better than most Americans. Your dog or cat probably gets a balanced formula of protein, carbohydrate, fat, fiber, vitamins and minerals. Yet, most of us eat for taste, cost, and convenience. The most commonly eaten food in America is heavily refined and nutritionally bankrupt white flour.
Meanwhile, our livestock eat the more nutritious wheat germ and bran that we discard. When our crops are not doing well, we examine the soil for nutrients, fluid and pH content. Our gardens prosper when we water, fertilize, and add a little broad spectrum mineral supplement, such as Miracle Gro.
A sign posted near the junk food vending machines in a major city zoo warns: "Do not feed this food to the animals or they may get sick and die." Think about it. The food that might kill a 400 pound ape is okay for a 40 pound child who is biologically very similar? If our gardens, field crops, pets, exotic zoo creatures and every other form of life on earth are all heavily dependent on their diet for health, then what makes us think that humans have transcended this dependence?
FoodFood is a rich tapestry of various chemicals. For some advanced cancer patients, TPN is often the only route which can provide adequate nutrient intake. However, for other patients, food can be an integral part of their recovery.
Food contains anti-cancer agents that we are only beginning to understand. One third of all prescription drugs in America originated as plant products. It is food that provides macronutrients, like carbohydrate, fat and protein, that drive extremely influential hormones and prostaglandins in your body. It is food that establishes your pH balance and electrolyte "soup" that bathes every cell in your body. While supplements are valuable, they cannot replace the fundamental importance of a wholesome diet.
This chapter can make or break your cancer-fighting program. The food discussed in this chapter has been fine tuned over the years to be tasty, nutritious, inexpensive and easy to prepare. Our eating habits are all acquired. We base our current diet on what mother cooked when we were younger; what our society, ethnic and religious groups prefer; what is advertised in print and electronic media, and what is available in the local grocery store. People in the Phillipines or the Amazon are born with structurally identical taste buds to Americans, yet they eat entirely different foods.
It takes about 3 weeks to acquire new eating habits. Try this program for 3 weeks, at which time it will become easier to stay with and you may just find that the nutrient-depleted junk food of yesterday really doesn't satisfy your taste buds like the following whole foods outlined by Noreen Quillin.
True ConfessionsPatrick Quillin has not always eaten as he does now. I now talk the talk and walk the walk. But I was raised in middle America, with roast beef, potatoes and gravy every Sunday afternoon; Captain Crunch for breakfast and a soda pop if you were good. White bread and bologna were the standard fare at home.
My parents provided what they felt were lavish and well balanced meals to the best of their knowledge, as millions of other American families.As I began studying nutrition in college, my eating habits improved, but were still far from enviable. I remember one semester in college while taking 19 units, 3 labs and working part time, I had no spare time to cook or even eat, so I kept a large box of Twinkies in the back of my van to provide "sustenance" when needed. For many months those Twinkies baked in the hot southern California sun and were always as fresh as the day they were bought.
I began to question the shelf life of this food: "If bacteria is not interested in this food, then what makes me think that my body cells are interested in it!"
At that point in my life, my lovely and talented wife Noreen began exploring alternative cooking styles. While I was studying the lofty sciences of nutritional biochemistry, Noreen was busy making nutritious taste delicious. It was a true turning point in my life. I started eating properly, felt better, got fewer colds, and could sincerely lecture on the subject to others.
Noreen got books on everything that you can do with soybeans, crockpots, pressure cookers, whole grains and vegetarian lifestyles. She bravely and diligently tried everything. We sometimes would come home with bags of food from some ethnic grocery store that we later had to re-identify in order to try some recipe. Some of it was good. Some was edible. Some we had to throw out. But we learned. And for the past 3 years, Noreen has taught cooking classes to our cancer patients. And we have all learned. What you have in this chapter is a time-tested approach to making your anti-cancer diet practical and tasty. Bon appetit!
Synegistic Forces in FoodsAlthough 1000 mg. daily of vitamin C has been shown to reduce the risk for stomach cancer, a small glass of orange juice containing only 37 mg of vitamin C is twice as likely to lower the chances for stomach cancer. Something in oranges is even more chemo-protective than vitamin C.
Although most people only absorb 20-50% of their ingested calcium, the remaining calcium binds up potentially damaging fats in the intestines to provide protection against colon cancer.In 1963, a major "player" in the American drug business, Merck, tried to patent a single antibiotic substance that was originally isolated from yogurt. But this substance did not work alone. Since then, researchers have found no less than 7 natural antibiotics that all contribute to yogurt's unique ability to protect the body from infections.
There are many anti-cancer agents in plant food, including beta-carotene, chlorophyll, over 500 mixed carotenoids, over 600 various bioflavonoids, lutein, lycopenes and canthaxanthin. The point is: we can isolate and concentrate certain factors in foods for use as therapeutic supplements in cancer therapy, but we must always rely heavily on the mysterious and elegant symphony of ingredients found in wholesome food.
How do Foods Protect Us From Toxins and Cancer?
By spurring on the body to produce more toxin scavengers, like glutathione peroxidase from indoles in cabbage.
By bolstering the immune system. Once the external therapies of chemo, radiation and surgery have eliminated the visible tumor, then the real and final cancer battle is totally dependent on the immune factors. Many foods and individual nutrients are influential here.
By stimulating certain detoxifying enzyme systems, like the liver's cytochrome P450.1 Selenium, vitamin C and milk thistle help here.
By shutting down the oncogene in human cells, that acts like a traitor to participate in cancer growth. Soybeans, vitamin A and D help here.
By directly killing tumor cells. The bioflavonoid quercetin, vitamin C, B-12, K, and garlic help here.
By directly killing bacteria or viruses that may cause cancer.
By binding up substances, like bile acids, that can decay into a carcinogenic substance. Fiber is a champion here.
By caging carcinogenic heavy metals, in a process called chelation (say 'key-lay-shun'), and carrying these toxic minerals out of the body. Bioflavonoids, vitamin C and garlic help this way.
By attaching to fats, to stop the carcinogenic fat "rusting" process. Calcium, vitamin E and fiber use this method.
By providing the known essential and unknown important nutrients that the body needs to better defend itself against pollutants.2 A well-nourished body is better able to detoxify, neutralize and excrete the ubiquitous poisons of the 20th century.
Using Guidelines That are UniversalThere have been a number of diets developed for the cancer patient: Drs. Moerman3, Livingston4, Gerson5, and the macrobiotic6 diets to mention a few. Each of these visionaries was a physician who spent at least several decades ministering to cancer patients.
While there are some differences in these diets, there is also some common ground. Peculariarities about each program include:
Dr. Moerman recommends supplements of iron for cancer patients, yet other data shows that elemental iron may accelerate cancer growth. He allows the yolk of the egg, but not the white part.Macrobiotics allow liberal amounts of soy sauce and pickles, yet restrict intake of fruit and fish.
Dr. Gerson used to encourage raw pureed calf's liver, which can contain a number of dangerous bacteria.
Dr. Livingston prohibits any chicken intake, since a cancer-causing organism thrives in chicken.
The points just mentioned are the oddities about each program which lack a good explanation. Yet, we don't want to throw out the "baby with the bath water". Each of these programs embraces a common thread, which includes a number of explanable nutrition principles. They all provide a diet that:
uses only unprocessed foods, nothing in a package with a label
uses high amounts of fresh vegetables
employs a low fat diet
emphasizes the importance of regularity
uses little or no dairy products, with yogurt as the preferred dairy selection
stabilizes blood sugar levels with no sweets and never eat something sweet by itself
increases potassium and reduces sodium intake
SuperfoodsThough there are many nourishing foods, there are only a few superfoods that contain such a potent collection of protective factors that they deserve regular inclusion in most diets.
Yogurt. While dairy products are the world's most common allergenic food, for 1/2 to 2/3 of the population, yogurt can provide some dramatic immune stimulation. On the surface, yogurt appears to be nothing more than a fermented dairy product. Yet, modern scientists find that the active culture of bacteria in yogurt (Lactobacillus) can fortify the immune system. Yogurt is an impressive immune stimulant.7 In both humans and animals, yogurt in the diet tripled the internal production of interferon (a powerful weapon of the immune system against tumor cells) while also raising the level of natural killer cells. Yogurt has been shown to slow down the growth of tumor cells in the GI tract while improving the ability of the immune system to destroy active tumor cells.8 Yogurt can block the production of carcinogenic agents in the colon. When scientists looked at the diet of 1010 women with breast cancer and compared them to an equally matched group without breast cancer, they found an inverse dose-dependent relationship: the more yogurt consumed, the lower the risk for breast cancer.9In several European studies, yogurt in animal studies was able to reverse tumor progress. A 1962 study found that 59 percent of 258 mice implanted with sarcoma cells were cured through yogurt. A more recent American study found a 30 percent cure rate through yogurt.10 While it is doubtful that yogurt is going to cure advanced human cancer, it is likely that yogurt can better fortify the cancer patient's immune system.Garlic. This stinky little vegetable has been used for 5000 years in various healing formulas. Pasteur noted that garlic killed all of the bacteria in his petri dishes. More importantly, garlic has been found to stimulate natural protection against tumor cells. Tarig Abdullah, MD of Florida found that white blood cells from garlic-fed people were able to kill 139% more tumor cells than white cells from non-garlic eaters.11 Garlic and onions fed to lab animals helped to decrease the number of skin tumors.12 Researchers found that onions provided major protection against expected tumors from DMBA in test animals.13 Mice with a genetic weakness toward cancer were fed raw garlic with a lower-than-expected tumor incidence.14
The most common form of cancer worldwide is stomach cancer. Chinese researchers find that a high intake of garlic and onions cuts the risk for stomach cancer in half.15 Garlic provides the liver with a certain amount of protection against carcinogenic chemicals. Scientists find that garlic is deadly to invading pathogens or tumor cells, but is harmless to normal healthy body cells; thus offering the hope of the truly selective toxin against cancer that is being sought worldwide.
Carotenoids. Green plants create sugars by capturing the sun's energy in a process called photosynthesis. The electrons that must be corralled in this process can be highly destructive. Hence, nature has evolved an impressive system of free radical protectors, including carotenoids and bioflavonoids, that act like the lead lining in a nuclear reactor to absorb dangerous unpaired electrons. Both of these substances have potential in stimulating the immune system while there is preliminary evidence that carotenoids may be directly toxic to tumor cells.Carotenoids are found in green and orange fruits and vegetables. Bioflavonoids are found in citrus, whole grains, honey, and other plant foods.Cruciferous vegetables. Broccoli, brussel sprouts, cabbage, and cauliflower were involved in the "ground floor" discovery that nutrition is linked to cancer. Lee Wattenberg, PhD of the University of Minnesota found in the 1970s that animals fed cruciferous vegetables had markedly lower cancer rates than matched controls. Since then, the active ingredient "indoles" have been isolated from cruciferous vegetables and found to be very protective against cancer. Scientists at Johns Hopkins University found that lab animals fed cruciferous vegetables and then exposed to the deadly carcinogen aflatoxin had a 90 percent reduction in their cancer rate.16Cruciferous vegetables are able to increase the body's production of glutathione peroxidase, which is one of the more important protective enzyme systems in the body.Mushrooms. Gourmet chefs have long prized various mushrooms for their subtle and exotic flavors. Now there is an abundance of scientific evidence showing that Rei-shi, Shiitake, and Maitake mushrooms are potent anti-cancer foods.17 Actually, Maitake literally means "dancing mushroom" since people would dance with joy when finding these delicate mushrooms on a country hillside. Oral extract of Maitake provided complete elimination of tumors in 40% of animals tested, while the remaining 60% of animals had a 90% elimination of tumors. Maitake contains a polysaccharide, called beta-glucan, which stimulates the immune system and even lowers blood pressure.Legumes. Seed foods (like soybeans) have a substance that can partially protect the seed from digestion, called protease inhibitors (PI). For many years, these substances were thought to be harmful. New evidence finds that PIs may squelch tumor growth.18 Researchers at the National Cancer Institute find a collection of substances in soybeans, including isoflavones and phytoestrogens, appear to have potent anti-cancer properties.19 Dr. Ann Kennedy has spent 20 years researching a compound in soybeans that:
prevents cancer in most animals exposed to a variety of carcinogens
retards cancer in some studies
lowers the toxic side effects of chemo and radiation therapy
reverts a cancer cell back to a normal healthy cell.20
Others. There are numerous foods that show an ability to slow tumor growth in some way. Apples, apricots, barley, citrus fruit, cranberries, fiber, figs, fish oil, fish, ginger, green tea, spinach, seaweed and other foods are among the reasons that I heavily favor the use of a mixed highly nutritious diet as the foundation for nutrition in cancer therapy
Food treats malnutrition. Food contains known essential nutrients that stimulate the immune system and provide valuable protection against carcinogens. Foods also contain poorly understood factors that may add measurably to the recovery of the cancer patient. Many foods have tremendous therapeutic value in helping the patient to internally fight cancer.
How to Use this SectionThis cookbook chapter was written with the cancer patient in mind and can also be helpful to people who want to eat properly but have little time to spend in the kitchen. Remember: the more wellness you have, the less illness you can have. One full week of menus is vegetarian style with no dairy products, but eggs are allowed. Another week's menu includes low fat poultry and fish. This will show you how to prepare meals that can be tasty and nutritious. The recipes are just a guide to show you the possibilities in creative cooking.
There is a section of tips to stimulate the appetite or lose weight rationally. Also included is the concept of bulk cooking, which is a great way to have a freezer full of ready-made meals at 1/4 the cost. "Fast food" at our house usually means microwaving some frozen beans, adding leftover bits of chicken or fish, and rolling this tasty collection into whole wheat tortillas with fresh salsa. The seasonings of Spike and Gayelords powdered vegetable broth may be purchased at your local heath food store.
Realize that there is no one perfect diet. Laying out a weekly menu of "nutritious" food is frought with peril, since another nutritionist could have their own valid criticisms of this program. Life is not perfect, nor are our eating habits. The most nourishing meal in the world is useless unless eaten. This chapter demonstrates healthy eating habits within the context of practical and tasty recipes. There are some noteworthy spartan cancer diets that only an extremely dedicated cancer patient can follow.
Given the choice between an unpalatable and labor-intensive eating program or returning to their old destructive eating habits, many cancer patients chose the later. Gleaning from dozens of good cookbooks and years of experience, the menus provided in this chapter make precious few compromises in nutritional quality while emphasizing taste, cost and practical preparation.
To Gain WeightDon't drink fluids or have soup or salad before the meal. It will fill you up on foods that are low in calorie density.
Eat on a large plate, thus avoiding food portions that appear overwhelming. Have small portions, knowing you can always have more.
People eat more when dining in groups than by themselves. Go to buffets. Eat with friends or other patients if possible. At our hospital, we were constantly battling the problem of patients not wanting to eat, no matter how appetizing the food looked and smelled. One Fourth of July, we set up a family picnic, with broiled chicken, baked beans, watermelon, corn on the cob and more. People who had not eaten well all week suddenly developed a ferocious appetite. We have been serving buffet family style meals ever since.
Distract your mind. Rent a good video and have your meal in front of the TV. Have you ever sat down with a bowl of popcorn and realized you had eaten the whole batch and didn't even realize it?
To Lose WeightEat 6 times a day. That doesn't mean 6 Big Macs. It means a light breakfast upon rising; a piece of fruit later in the midmorning; a salad and half a sandwich at lunch; and the other 1/2 of the sandwich at mid-afternoon. Even if you over-indulge at one meal, make sure you eat on schedule. This concept, called periodicity, trains the mind and body that food is constantly coming into the system and there is no need to overindulge or become exceedingly efficient at storing calories.
Have warm fluids, like tea or soup, about 20 minutes before mealtime.
Use a smaller plate. It gives the illusion that you're eating more.
Drink plenty of purified water. It's good for both weight loss, constipation and wrinkles.
Adjust your bathroom scale to the exact weight you want to be. As you lose weight, you can readjust it closer to the zero, but always see your weight as you want it to be. This way when you think about having that huge piece of cake, you will think to yourself, "A person of my weight won't eat that."
Exercise within your own ability. Make sure you enjoy it.
Eat more high-fiber foods, such as fruits, vegetables, beans and whole-grain cereals.
Plan your meals and snacks instead of waiting until you are hungry.
Dining Tips For The Cancer PatientYou eat with your eyes first, so make sure that your plate looks appetizing. Have different colors. No matter how tasty the food might be, if it is all the same color (i.e. turkey, mash potatoes, and cauliflower), then you won't enjoy the meal as much.
Crock pot cooking is a great idea. It is a relatively inexpensive kitchen tool which cures the 5 o'clock dilemma of haphazard meal preparation. There are many advantages to making your dinner in the morning. You prepare the food early which means that the kitchen will be clean and the urge to order out at 5 pm has been eliminated. Also, the aromas of cooking food wafting throughout the house can help stimulate a sagging appetite.
Cook up more food than is needed. Freeze leftovers in baggies in individual servings. This way you will have a freezer full of ready-to-eat nutritious meals.
Pressure cooking is wonderful. Your cooking time for whole grains and beans will be cut by 75%.
Instead of soda pop, try diluted apple juice or ginger tea with 1/4 tsp of vitamin C per cup.
Ginger helps to relieve nausea. You can take tablets, or drink ginger tea cold or hot.
Acupressure wrist bands, available at your pharmacy or health food store, also help to relieve nausea.
Avoid frying foods. Make sure that you have foods like carrot sticks or baked whole wheat tortilla chips to satisfy that need for crunchy food.Eating OutIceberg lettuce is the most common salad bar offering, but is "junk food" relative to most other vegetables. Skip the iceberg lettuce and enjoy the healthier fruits, vegetables and whole-grain foods from the salad bar. A good rule of thumb: the deeper the color of the vegetable, the more nourishing it is. Dark greens are better than pale greens, dark orange squash is better than pale squash, and so on. In nature, cauliflower is a dark green vegetable, until human intervention ties the leaves around the developing flower to deprive it of sunlight.
Many restaurants offer low-calorie or light meals with gourmet versions.
Instead of accepting that "fried" meal from a restaurant menu, most places will steam or broil your food.
Airlines can be very accommodating in having a special meal ready for you. Give them at least 1 week advance notice.
Ask for the salad dressing to be served on the side.
Have the rich sauces or gravies left out.
Avoid sauteed and deep-fried food.
Foods to Highlight in Your DietYogurtSproutsOnionsGarlicGingerCabbage, broccoli, Brussel sprouts, cauliflowerCarrotsCoybeans, garbanzo beans and other legumesRice, barley and other whole grainsSea vegetables, a.k.a. seaweedDark green and dark orange fruits & vegetablesApples, berriesEggsFigsFishHoney
Beverages to HighlightPurified waterCafixRomaHerb teaVitamin C powder & honey in hot waterGinger teaHot natural apple juice with vitamin CFresh orange juicePostumChickoryJapanese Green teaRoasted rice or barley teaVinegar, honey & water
Dragon-Slayer Shake
I hate taking pills, even when I know the value of using supplements to improve my health. That's why I developed this "shake". While most of us are familiar with milkshakes, there are many variations on that theme which can provide nutrient-dense foods in a convenient format. I have found that many cancer patients would avoid taking their supplements of vitamins, minerals and botanicals because they didn't like swallowing pills. To solve that problem, I have developed this shake, which can incorporate many nutrients in powder form, thus eliminating taking pills at all, and the remaining pills are easier to swallow with the lubricating ability of this smooth shake.
Shakes can be a quick and easy breakfast. Depending on your calorie requirements, use this shake in addition to or instead of the breakfast suggestions listed later. My typical breakfast consists of this Dragon-Slayer shake, whole grain rolls, bagles, muffins or Pita bread, along with a large serving of fresh fruit in season.
Take up to half of your pills with the "Dragon-Slayer shake" and save the remaining pills for later in the day. Taking supplements in small divided dosages helps to maintain sustained levels of nutrients in the bloodstream.
Ingredients:4-8 ounces of dilute fruit juice, including apple, cranberry, orange, fresh squeezed, juice extracted, etc. I add twice the specified water to a can of frozen unsweetened concentrated apple juice from your grocery store.
10-15 grams of powdered protein from (listed in order of preference): whey, rice, soy, alfalfa, egg white, non-fat yogurt solids, spirulina. Do not use powdered proteins that are based upon non-fat milk solids. Too many people are allergic to this product. Your health food store should have a dozen different products to select from. ProMod is a name brand pure whey protein product.
1/2 tablespoon of Perfect 7. This is an excellent product to maintain regularity and encourage proper detoxification. It includes fiber, an herbal laxative, proper bacteria for colonizing the intestines and botanicals for detoxification. You may be surprised at the fecal matter eliminated in the first few weeks on this program.
One sliced ripe banana or less, depending on how thick you like your shakes. Banana adds texture via pectin to make this shake have true milk shake viscosity.
2-4 grams of buffered vitamin C powder from Emergen-C or Seraphim. Both products have an effervescent action that brings a "soda pop" like flavor to this drink, along with high doses of vitamin C that won't upset even the most delicate stomach.
1 tablespoon of OmegaSyn 1 fatty acids (a blend of EPA and GLA) from BioSyn (800-346-2703)
1/2 tablespoon of pure, cold pressed flaxseed oil (optional)
1/2 tablespoon of wheat germ oil (optional)
For those who need to slow down weight loss or gain weight, add 2 tablespoons of MCT (medium chain triglyceride) oil
Directions:Use a large blender or a small hand held blender, like the ones originally developed to mix diet drinks. First add the oils (EPA, wheat germ and flax) to coat the bottom of the container for easy mixing and cleaning. Add the powdered ingredients and cut up fruit next. Blend until smooth, or about 15 seconds.
Bulk Cooking
YogurtScald (foaming but not yet at boiling) 8 cups of milk with one cup of added powdered milk.
Turn heat down and simmer for at least 5 minutes; the longer you simmer (up to 25 minutes) the thicker your yogurt will be.
While the milk is simmering, place 2 tablespoons of live cultured good-tasting yogurt in each of two quart-glass peanut butter jars and stir briefly with a plastic spoon until creamy.
After simmering milk, let the temperature drop to 49 degrees C. (112 F.). You don't want to kill the yogurt bacteria with milk that is too hot.
Add about a half cup of the warm milk to the yogurt starter in each of two jars and stir gently but thoroughly. Then add the rest of the milk to the glass jars.
Place the jars (uncovered) in a picnic thermos (the size that holds a six pack of beer). Close the thermos lid and leave for 6-10 hours. The longer it sits, the thicker it gets. Do not open container and peek while the fermentation is occurring.
This recipe allows you to cut the cost of yogurt from $14.00 per gallon to $2.10 per gallon (cost of milk).
Growing Your Own SproutsYou will need a glass jar (quart size or larger), a soft plastic screen for the top, and a rubber band to hold the screen in place. There are also commercial sprouting kits available in most health food stores. Place about one heaping tablespoon of seeds in your glass container with the screen doubled on the top. The seeds will expand about tenfold as they sprout, so allow enough room for their expansion. Fill the container half full of purified water and let stand overnight. Next morning drain and rinse the seeds. Let stand inverted over the sink for proper drainage. Rinse and drain twice each day for the next 6-7 days. Keep the jar in a dimly lit area.
Larger seeds, like peas, beans, and lentils take a shorter time to grow and should not be allowed to grow more than a half inch long, since they will develop a bitter flavor. Mung bean sprouts can get up to two inches in length without bitter flavor. Wheat, barley, oats, and other grass plants make terrific sprouts. Smaller seeds, like alfalfa, can grow to an inch in length without any bitter flavor. For some extra vitamin A, let the alfalfa sprouts sit in a sunny window for the last day before eating. The green color indicates the welcome addition of chlorophyll, folacin and beta-carotene.
In excess quantities, sprouts may blunt the immune system in humans. Do not eat more than two cups of sprouts daily.
Homemade Mayonnaise
1 egg1 tsp. prepared mustard1/2 tsp. salt3 tbs apple cider1 cup sunflower or canola oil
Put the egg, mustard, salt, and 1/2 cup of the oil in the container of an electric blender or food processor. Blend until smooth. Continue blending or processing while adding the remaining oil very slowly in a steady stream into the center of the egg mixture. Use a small rubber spatula to scrape the mayonnaise into a jar. Store covered in the refrigerator. Yields about 2 cups.
Note: If the mayonnaise curdles, blend or process 1 egg in the container of a clean electric blender or food processor and gradually pour the curdled mayonnaise back in while blending or processing at high speed.
Spicy Beans
3 cups of pinto beans1 large onion cut up3-4 garlic cloves minced2-3 dry red peppers cut up fine1 tablespoon chili powder1 tsp cumin powder1/3 cup olive oilLite salt
Sort and wash beans in a colander. Soak the beans overnight in about 8 cups of water in a heavy saucepan. Drain, then fill with another 8 cups of clean water. Add rest of the ingredients. Cover and simmer for 90-120 minutes or until beans are tender. Blend with an egg beater. Add a bit of salt to taste.
If you need the beans sooner:Rinse beans. Then fill pot with beans and 8 cups of water Allow to boil for 2 minutes. Let sit in a covered pot for 1 hour. Proceed to next step.
(For best results, use a pressure cooker)Place the soaked and rinsed beans in 5 cups of water in pot. Add ingredients. Bring lid weight to a gentle rocking motion, then pressure cook for 25 minutes. Let cool down. Beat with a mixer to desired consistency.
Barley
Rinse barley and cook for 35-45 minutes in a large volume of boiling water. Barley increases its bulk by four fold when cooked. Drain excess water. Store extra barley in baggies and place in freezer for later use. Season the barley with spices that go with the entree. Spike, Mrs. Dash and other herbal seasonings go with anything.
If using a pressure cooker, use twice the amount of barley measurement for the water. Bring to a rock, then immediately remove from stove burner. Follow rest of the directions.
Better Butter
Blend equal parts of olive oil and softened butter.
Whole Wheat Piecrust
1 cup whole wheat pastry flour1/2 teaspoon salt3 tablespoons oil1/4 cup water
Stir dry ingredients together. Mix in oil. Add enough of the water to make the dough form a ball. Roll flat between sheets of waxed paper and lift into pan. Make edge.
Roasted Brown Rice or Barley Tea
Dry roast uncooked grain over medium flame for 10 minutes or until a fragrant aroma develops. Stir and shake pan occasionally. Add 2 to 3 tablespoons of the grain to 1 1/2 quarts of purified water. Bring to a boil, simmer 10 to 15 minutes.
The following recipes are not carved in stone. If you do not like a certain spice or seasoning, leave it out. Also, some days you might feel like cooking more than others. These menus were based more on giving maximum variety with different foods than offering no-effort cooking. Feel free to mix the ideas to your pleasure.Also, it is a good idea to have leftovers to freeze in serving sizes so you can just pull out easy-to-serve dinners on days you want to relax.
more info at:
http://www.dreddyclinic.com/findinformation/cc/skincancer.htm
Chemotherapy Quotes
"Two to 4% of cancers respond to chemotherapy….The bottom line is for a few kinds of cancer chemo is a life extending procedure---Hodgkin's disease, Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia (ALL), Testicular cancer, and Choriocarcinoma."---Ralph Moss, Ph.D. 1995 Author of Questioning Chemotherapy.
"NCI now actually anticipates further increases, and not decreases, in cancer mortality rates, from 171/100,000 in 1984 to 175/100,000 by the year 2000!"--Samuel Epstein.
"A study of over 10,000 patients shows clearly that chemo’s supposedly strong track record with Hodgkin’s disease (lymphoma) is actually a lie. Patients who underwent chemo were 14 times more likely to develop leukemia and 6 times more likely to develop cancers of the bones, joints, and soft tissues than those patients who did not undergo chemotherapy (NCI Journal 87:10)."—John Diamond
Children who are successfully treated for Hodgkin's disease are 18 times more likely later to develop secondary malignant tumours. Girls face a 35 per cent chance of developing breast cancer by the time they are 40---which is 75 times greater than the average. The risk of leukemia increased markedly four years after the ending of successful treatment, and reached a plateau after 14 years, but the risk of developing solid tumours remained high and approached 30 per cent at 30 years (New Eng J Med, March 21, 1996)
"Success of most chemotherapy is appalling…There is no scientific evidence for its ability to extend in any appreciable way the lives of patients suffering from the most common organic cancer…chemotherapy for malignancies too advanced for surgery which accounts for 80% of all cancers is a scientific wasteland."---Dr Ulrich Abel. 1990
The New England Journal of Medicine Reports— War on Cancer Is a Failure: Despite $30 billion spent on research and treatments since 1970, cancer remains "undefeated," with a death rate not lower but 6% higher in 1997 than 1970, stated John C. Bailar III, M.D., Ph.D., and Heather L. Gornik, M.H.S., both of the Department of Health Studies at the University of Chicago in Illinois. "The war against cancer is far from over," stated Dr. Bailar. "The effect of new treatments for cancer on mortality has been largely disappointing."
"My studies have proved conclusively that untreated cancer victims live up to four times longer than treated individuals. If one has cancer and opts to do nothing at all, he will live longer and feel better than if he undergoes radiation, chemotherapy or surgery, other than when used in immediate life-threatening situations."---Prof Jones. (1956 Transactions of the N.Y. Academy of Medical Sciences, vol 6. There is a fifty page article by Hardin Jones of National Cancer Institute of Bethesda, Maryland. He surveyed global cancer of all types and compared the untreated and the treated, to conclude that the untreated outlives the treated, both in terms of quality and in terms of quantity. Secondly he said, "Cancer does not cure". Third he said "There is a physiological mechanism which finishes off an individual".)
"With some cancers, notably liver, lung, pancreas, bone and advanced breast, our 5 year survival from traditional therapy alone is virtually the same as it was 30 years ago."---P Quillin, Ph.D.
"1.7% increase in terms of success rate a year, its nothing. By the time we get to the 24 century we might have effective treatments, Star Trek will be long gone by that time." Ralph Moss.
"….chemotherapy’s success record is dismal. It can achieve remissions in about 7% of all human cancers; for an additional 15% of cases, survival can be "prolonged" beyond the point at which death would be expected without treatment. This type of survival is not the same as a cure or even restored quality of life."—John Diamond, M.D.
"Keep in mind that the 5 year mark is still used as the official guideline for "cure" by mainstream oncologists. Statistically, the 5 year cure makes chemotherapy look good for certain kinds of cancer, but when you follow cancer patients beyond 5 years, the reality often shifts in a dramatic way."—Diamond.
Studies show that women taking tamoxifen after surviving breast cancer then have a high propensity to develop endometrial cancer. The NCI and Zeneca Pharmaceuticals, which makes the drug, aggressively lobbied State of California regulators to keep them from adding tamoxifen to their list of carcinogens. Zeneca is one of the sponsors of Breast Cancer Awareness Month.
"Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy…Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade. Yet doctors still use chemotherapy for these tumours…Women with breast cancer are likely to die faster with chemo than without it."—Alan Levin, M.D.
According to the Cancer Statistics for 1995, published by the ACS in their small journal (2), the 5-year survival rate has improved from 50%-56% for whites and 39%-40% for blacks from 1974/1976 - 1983/1990. However, the data is taken from FIVE of the states with the lowest death rates AND the smallest populations! NONE of the 10 states with the highest death rates AND comprising 34% of the Total U.S. Cancer Deaths, were included in the data! Also, in prior years, the Composite (Ave.) 5-year survival rate for ALL Cancers Combined was computed and published. This Ave. 5-year survival crept upward to 50%, in the early nineties. It now stands around 51-52%, due primarily to the improvement of 11% survival for Colon and 13% increased survival for Prostate. It gets worse. The ACS boasts of "statistically significant" results when Uterine Ca survival drops from 89%/60%-85%/55% (W/B)?? Also, Pancreas Ca is 3-3 (W) and Laryngeal Ca survival drops from 59%-53% (B) while Cervical Ca drops from 63%-56% (B). Liver Ca improves from 4%-7%. I wonder how many Pancreatic and Hepatic Ca patients cheered these dramatic results? Ovarian Ca = 36%/40% - 42%/38% (W/B) and Breast Ca = 75%/63% - 82%/66% (W/B). In 16 years the Breast Ca rate improved 3-7%, while Uterine Ca decreased 4-5%. Aren't these marvelous results that the Cancer Establishment should boast about??---RD Hodgell, M.D.
"The five year cancer survival statistics of the American Cancer Society are very misleading. They now count things that are not cancer, and, because we are able to diagnose at an earlier stage of the disease, patients falsely appear to live longer. Our whole cancer research in the past 20 years has been a failure. More people over 30 are dying from cancer than ever before…More women with mild or benign diseases are being included in statistics and reported as being "cured".
When government officials point to survival figures and say they are winning the war against cancer they are using those survival rates improperly."---Dr J. Bailer, New England Journal of Medicine (Dr Bailer’s answer to questions put by Neal Barnard MD of the Physicians Committee For Responsible Medicine and published in PCRM Update, sept/oct 1990.
"I look upon cancer in the same way that I look upon heart disease, arthritis, high blood pressure, or even obesity, for that matter, in that by dramatically strengthening the body's immune system through diet, nutritional supplements, and exercise, the body can rid itself of the cancer, just as it does in other degenerative diseases. Consequently, I wouldn't have chemotherapy and radiation because I'm not interested in therapies that cripple the immune system, and, in my opinion, virtually ensure failure for the majority of cancer patients."---Dr Julian Whitaker, M.D.
"Finding a cure for cancer is absolutely contraindicated by the profits of the cancer industry’s chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery cash trough."—Dr Diamond, M.D.
"We have a multi-billion dollar industry that is killing people, right and left, just for financial gain. Their idea of research is to see whether two doses of this poison is better than three doses of that poison."—Glen Warner, M.D. oncologist.
John Robbins:
"Percentage of cancer patients whose lives are predictably saved by chemotherapy - 3%
Conclusive evidence (majority of cancers) that chemotherapy has any positive influcence on survival or quality of life - none.
Percentage of oncologists who said if they had cancer they would not participate in chemotherapy trials due to its "ineffectiveness and its unacceptable toxicity" - 75%
Percentage of people with cancer in the U.S. who receive chemotherapy - 75%.
Company that accounts for nearly half of the chemotherapy sales in the world - Bristol-Meyers Squibb.
Chairman of the board of Bristol-Meyers - Richard L. Gelb.
Mr. Gelb's other job: vice chairman, board of overseers, board of managers, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, World's largest private cancer treatment and research center.
Chairman, Memorial Sloan-Kettering's board of overseers, board of managers - John S. Reed.
Reed's other job - director, Philip Morris (tobacco company).
Director, Ivax, Inc., a prominent chemotherapy company - Samuel Broder.
Broder's other job (until 1995) - executive director, National Cancer Institute."from Reclaiming Our Health: Exploding the Medical Myth and Embracing the Source of True Healing by John Robbins.
"If you can shrink the tumour 50% or more for 28 days you have got the FDA's definition of an active drug. That is called a response rate, so you have a response..(but) when you look to see if there is any life prolongation from taking this treatment what you find is all kinds of hocus pocus and song and dance about the disease free survival, and this and that. In the end there is no proof that chemotherapy in the vast majority of cases actually extends life, and this is the GREAT LIE about chemotherapy, that somehow there is a correlation between shrinking a tumour and extending the life of the patient."---Ralph Moss
"The majority of publications equate the effect of chemotherapy with (tumour) response, irrespective of survival. Many oncologists take it for granted that response to therapy prolongs survival, an opinion which is based on a fallacy and which is not supported by clinical studies. To date there is no clear evidence that the treated patients, as a whole, benefit from chemotherapy as to their quality of life."---Abel.1990.
"For the majority of the cancers we examined, the actual improvements (in survival) have been small or have been overestimated by the published rates...It is difficult to find that there has been much progress...(For breast cancer), there is a slight improvement...(which) is considerably less than reported."---General Accounting Office
"As a chemist trained to interpret data, it is incromprehensible to me that physicians can ignore the clear evidence that chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good."---Alan Nixon, Ph.D., Past President, American Chemical Society.
"He said, "I'm giving cancer patients over here at this major cancer clinic drugs that are killing them, and I can't stop it because they say the protocol's what's important." And I say, "But the patient's not doing well." They say, "The protocol's what's important, not the patient." And he said, "You can't believe what goes on in the name of medicine and science in this country." --Gary Null
The Politics of Cancer---Epstein
That in spite of over $20 billion expenditures since the "War against Cancer" was launched by President Nixon in 1971, there has been little if any significant improvement in treatment and survival rates for most common cancers, in spite of contrary misleading hype by the cancer establishment---the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and American Cancer Society (ACS).
That the cancer establishment remains myopically fixated on damage control _diagnosis and treatment _ and basic genetic research, with, not always benign, indifference to cancer prevention. Meanwhile, the incidence of cancer, including nonsmoking cancers, has escalated to epidemic proportions with lifetime cancer risks now approaching 50%.
That the NCI has a long track record of budgetary shell games in efforts to mislead Congress and the public with its claim that it allocates substantial resources to cancer prevention. Over the last year, the NCI has made a series of widely divergent claims, ranging from $480 million to $1 billion, for its prevention budget while realistic estimates are well under $100 million.
That the NCI allocates less than 1% of its budget to research on occupational cancer _ the most avoidable of all cancers _ which accounts for well over 10% of all adult cancer deaths, besides being a major cause of childhood cancer.
That cancer establishment policies, particularly those of the ACS, are strongly influenced by pervasive conflicts of interest with the cancer drug and other industries. As admitted by former NCI director Samuel Broder, the NCI has become "what amounts to a governmental pharmaceutical company."
That the MD Anderson Comprehensive Cancer Center was sued in August, 1998 for making unsubstantiated claims that it cures "well over 50% of people with cancer."
That the NCI, with enthusiastic support from the ACS _ the tail that wags the NCI dog _ has effectively blocked funding for research and clinical trials on promising non-toxic alternative cancer drugs for decades, in favor of highly toxic and largely ineffective patented drugs developed by the multibillion dollar global cancer drug industry. Additionally, the cancer establishment has systematically harassed the proponents of non-toxic alternative cancer drugs.
That, as reported in The Chronicle of Philanthropy, the ACS is "more interested in accumulating wealth than saving lives." Furthermore, it is the only known "charity" that makes contributions to political parties.
That the NCI and ACS have embarked on unethical trials with two hormonal drugs, tamoxifen and Evista, in ill-conceived attempts to prevent breast cancer in healthy women while suppressing evidence that these drugs are known to cause liver and ovarian cancer, respectively, and in spite of the short-term lethal complications of tamoxifen.
The establishment also proposes further chemoprevention trials this fall on tamoxifen, and also Evista, in spite of two published long-term European studies on the ineffectiveness of tamoxifen. This represents medical malpractice verging on the criminal.
That the ACS and NCI have failed to provide Congress and regulatory agencies with available scientific information on a wide range of unwitting exposures to avoidable carcinogens in air, water, the workplace, and consumer products _food, cosmetics and toiletries, and household products. As a result, corrective legislative and regulatory action have not been taken.
That the cancer establishment has also failed to provide the public, particularly African American and underprivileged ethnic groups with their disproportionately higher cancer incidence rates, with information on avoidable carcinogenic exposures, thus depriving them of their right-to-know and effectively preventing them from taking action to protect themselves _ a flagrant denial of environmental justice.
more info at:
"NCI now actually anticipates further increases, and not decreases, in cancer mortality rates, from 171/100,000 in 1984 to 175/100,000 by the year 2000!"--Samuel Epstein.
"A study of over 10,000 patients shows clearly that chemo’s supposedly strong track record with Hodgkin’s disease (lymphoma) is actually a lie. Patients who underwent chemo were 14 times more likely to develop leukemia and 6 times more likely to develop cancers of the bones, joints, and soft tissues than those patients who did not undergo chemotherapy (NCI Journal 87:10)."—John Diamond
Children who are successfully treated for Hodgkin's disease are 18 times more likely later to develop secondary malignant tumours. Girls face a 35 per cent chance of developing breast cancer by the time they are 40---which is 75 times greater than the average. The risk of leukemia increased markedly four years after the ending of successful treatment, and reached a plateau after 14 years, but the risk of developing solid tumours remained high and approached 30 per cent at 30 years (New Eng J Med, March 21, 1996)
"Success of most chemotherapy is appalling…There is no scientific evidence for its ability to extend in any appreciable way the lives of patients suffering from the most common organic cancer…chemotherapy for malignancies too advanced for surgery which accounts for 80% of all cancers is a scientific wasteland."---Dr Ulrich Abel. 1990
The New England Journal of Medicine Reports— War on Cancer Is a Failure: Despite $30 billion spent on research and treatments since 1970, cancer remains "undefeated," with a death rate not lower but 6% higher in 1997 than 1970, stated John C. Bailar III, M.D., Ph.D., and Heather L. Gornik, M.H.S., both of the Department of Health Studies at the University of Chicago in Illinois. "The war against cancer is far from over," stated Dr. Bailar. "The effect of new treatments for cancer on mortality has been largely disappointing."
"My studies have proved conclusively that untreated cancer victims live up to four times longer than treated individuals. If one has cancer and opts to do nothing at all, he will live longer and feel better than if he undergoes radiation, chemotherapy or surgery, other than when used in immediate life-threatening situations."---Prof Jones. (1956 Transactions of the N.Y. Academy of Medical Sciences, vol 6. There is a fifty page article by Hardin Jones of National Cancer Institute of Bethesda, Maryland. He surveyed global cancer of all types and compared the untreated and the treated, to conclude that the untreated outlives the treated, both in terms of quality and in terms of quantity. Secondly he said, "Cancer does not cure". Third he said "There is a physiological mechanism which finishes off an individual".)
"With some cancers, notably liver, lung, pancreas, bone and advanced breast, our 5 year survival from traditional therapy alone is virtually the same as it was 30 years ago."---P Quillin, Ph.D.
"1.7% increase in terms of success rate a year, its nothing. By the time we get to the 24 century we might have effective treatments, Star Trek will be long gone by that time." Ralph Moss.
"….chemotherapy’s success record is dismal. It can achieve remissions in about 7% of all human cancers; for an additional 15% of cases, survival can be "prolonged" beyond the point at which death would be expected without treatment. This type of survival is not the same as a cure or even restored quality of life."—John Diamond, M.D.
"Keep in mind that the 5 year mark is still used as the official guideline for "cure" by mainstream oncologists. Statistically, the 5 year cure makes chemotherapy look good for certain kinds of cancer, but when you follow cancer patients beyond 5 years, the reality often shifts in a dramatic way."—Diamond.
Studies show that women taking tamoxifen after surviving breast cancer then have a high propensity to develop endometrial cancer. The NCI and Zeneca Pharmaceuticals, which makes the drug, aggressively lobbied State of California regulators to keep them from adding tamoxifen to their list of carcinogens. Zeneca is one of the sponsors of Breast Cancer Awareness Month.
"Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy…Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade. Yet doctors still use chemotherapy for these tumours…Women with breast cancer are likely to die faster with chemo than without it."—Alan Levin, M.D.
According to the Cancer Statistics for 1995, published by the ACS in their small journal (2), the 5-year survival rate has improved from 50%-56% for whites and 39%-40% for blacks from 1974/1976 - 1983/1990. However, the data is taken from FIVE of the states with the lowest death rates AND the smallest populations! NONE of the 10 states with the highest death rates AND comprising 34% of the Total U.S. Cancer Deaths, were included in the data! Also, in prior years, the Composite (Ave.) 5-year survival rate for ALL Cancers Combined was computed and published. This Ave. 5-year survival crept upward to 50%, in the early nineties. It now stands around 51-52%, due primarily to the improvement of 11% survival for Colon and 13% increased survival for Prostate. It gets worse. The ACS boasts of "statistically significant" results when Uterine Ca survival drops from 89%/60%-85%/55% (W/B)?? Also, Pancreas Ca is 3-3 (W) and Laryngeal Ca survival drops from 59%-53% (B) while Cervical Ca drops from 63%-56% (B). Liver Ca improves from 4%-7%. I wonder how many Pancreatic and Hepatic Ca patients cheered these dramatic results? Ovarian Ca = 36%/40% - 42%/38% (W/B) and Breast Ca = 75%/63% - 82%/66% (W/B). In 16 years the Breast Ca rate improved 3-7%, while Uterine Ca decreased 4-5%. Aren't these marvelous results that the Cancer Establishment should boast about??---RD Hodgell, M.D.
"The five year cancer survival statistics of the American Cancer Society are very misleading. They now count things that are not cancer, and, because we are able to diagnose at an earlier stage of the disease, patients falsely appear to live longer. Our whole cancer research in the past 20 years has been a failure. More people over 30 are dying from cancer than ever before…More women with mild or benign diseases are being included in statistics and reported as being "cured".
When government officials point to survival figures and say they are winning the war against cancer they are using those survival rates improperly."---Dr J. Bailer, New England Journal of Medicine (Dr Bailer’s answer to questions put by Neal Barnard MD of the Physicians Committee For Responsible Medicine and published in PCRM Update, sept/oct 1990.
"I look upon cancer in the same way that I look upon heart disease, arthritis, high blood pressure, or even obesity, for that matter, in that by dramatically strengthening the body's immune system through diet, nutritional supplements, and exercise, the body can rid itself of the cancer, just as it does in other degenerative diseases. Consequently, I wouldn't have chemotherapy and radiation because I'm not interested in therapies that cripple the immune system, and, in my opinion, virtually ensure failure for the majority of cancer patients."---Dr Julian Whitaker, M.D.
"Finding a cure for cancer is absolutely contraindicated by the profits of the cancer industry’s chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery cash trough."—Dr Diamond, M.D.
"We have a multi-billion dollar industry that is killing people, right and left, just for financial gain. Their idea of research is to see whether two doses of this poison is better than three doses of that poison."—Glen Warner, M.D. oncologist.
John Robbins:
"Percentage of cancer patients whose lives are predictably saved by chemotherapy - 3%
Conclusive evidence (majority of cancers) that chemotherapy has any positive influcence on survival or quality of life - none.
Percentage of oncologists who said if they had cancer they would not participate in chemotherapy trials due to its "ineffectiveness and its unacceptable toxicity" - 75%
Percentage of people with cancer in the U.S. who receive chemotherapy - 75%.
Company that accounts for nearly half of the chemotherapy sales in the world - Bristol-Meyers Squibb.
Chairman of the board of Bristol-Meyers - Richard L. Gelb.
Mr. Gelb's other job: vice chairman, board of overseers, board of managers, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, World's largest private cancer treatment and research center.
Chairman, Memorial Sloan-Kettering's board of overseers, board of managers - John S. Reed.
Reed's other job - director, Philip Morris (tobacco company).
Director, Ivax, Inc., a prominent chemotherapy company - Samuel Broder.
Broder's other job (until 1995) - executive director, National Cancer Institute."from Reclaiming Our Health: Exploding the Medical Myth and Embracing the Source of True Healing by John Robbins.
"If you can shrink the tumour 50% or more for 28 days you have got the FDA's definition of an active drug. That is called a response rate, so you have a response..(but) when you look to see if there is any life prolongation from taking this treatment what you find is all kinds of hocus pocus and song and dance about the disease free survival, and this and that. In the end there is no proof that chemotherapy in the vast majority of cases actually extends life, and this is the GREAT LIE about chemotherapy, that somehow there is a correlation between shrinking a tumour and extending the life of the patient."---Ralph Moss
"The majority of publications equate the effect of chemotherapy with (tumour) response, irrespective of survival. Many oncologists take it for granted that response to therapy prolongs survival, an opinion which is based on a fallacy and which is not supported by clinical studies. To date there is no clear evidence that the treated patients, as a whole, benefit from chemotherapy as to their quality of life."---Abel.1990.
"For the majority of the cancers we examined, the actual improvements (in survival) have been small or have been overestimated by the published rates...It is difficult to find that there has been much progress...(For breast cancer), there is a slight improvement...(which) is considerably less than reported."---General Accounting Office
"As a chemist trained to interpret data, it is incromprehensible to me that physicians can ignore the clear evidence that chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good."---Alan Nixon, Ph.D., Past President, American Chemical Society.
"He said, "I'm giving cancer patients over here at this major cancer clinic drugs that are killing them, and I can't stop it because they say the protocol's what's important." And I say, "But the patient's not doing well." They say, "The protocol's what's important, not the patient." And he said, "You can't believe what goes on in the name of medicine and science in this country." --Gary Null
The Politics of Cancer---Epstein
That in spite of over $20 billion expenditures since the "War against Cancer" was launched by President Nixon in 1971, there has been little if any significant improvement in treatment and survival rates for most common cancers, in spite of contrary misleading hype by the cancer establishment---the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and American Cancer Society (ACS).
That the cancer establishment remains myopically fixated on damage control _diagnosis and treatment _ and basic genetic research, with, not always benign, indifference to cancer prevention. Meanwhile, the incidence of cancer, including nonsmoking cancers, has escalated to epidemic proportions with lifetime cancer risks now approaching 50%.
That the NCI has a long track record of budgetary shell games in efforts to mislead Congress and the public with its claim that it allocates substantial resources to cancer prevention. Over the last year, the NCI has made a series of widely divergent claims, ranging from $480 million to $1 billion, for its prevention budget while realistic estimates are well under $100 million.
That the NCI allocates less than 1% of its budget to research on occupational cancer _ the most avoidable of all cancers _ which accounts for well over 10% of all adult cancer deaths, besides being a major cause of childhood cancer.
That cancer establishment policies, particularly those of the ACS, are strongly influenced by pervasive conflicts of interest with the cancer drug and other industries. As admitted by former NCI director Samuel Broder, the NCI has become "what amounts to a governmental pharmaceutical company."
That the MD Anderson Comprehensive Cancer Center was sued in August, 1998 for making unsubstantiated claims that it cures "well over 50% of people with cancer."
That the NCI, with enthusiastic support from the ACS _ the tail that wags the NCI dog _ has effectively blocked funding for research and clinical trials on promising non-toxic alternative cancer drugs for decades, in favor of highly toxic and largely ineffective patented drugs developed by the multibillion dollar global cancer drug industry. Additionally, the cancer establishment has systematically harassed the proponents of non-toxic alternative cancer drugs.
That, as reported in The Chronicle of Philanthropy, the ACS is "more interested in accumulating wealth than saving lives." Furthermore, it is the only known "charity" that makes contributions to political parties.
That the NCI and ACS have embarked on unethical trials with two hormonal drugs, tamoxifen and Evista, in ill-conceived attempts to prevent breast cancer in healthy women while suppressing evidence that these drugs are known to cause liver and ovarian cancer, respectively, and in spite of the short-term lethal complications of tamoxifen.
The establishment also proposes further chemoprevention trials this fall on tamoxifen, and also Evista, in spite of two published long-term European studies on the ineffectiveness of tamoxifen. This represents medical malpractice verging on the criminal.
That the ACS and NCI have failed to provide Congress and regulatory agencies with available scientific information on a wide range of unwitting exposures to avoidable carcinogens in air, water, the workplace, and consumer products _food, cosmetics and toiletries, and household products. As a result, corrective legislative and regulatory action have not been taken.
That the cancer establishment has also failed to provide the public, particularly African American and underprivileged ethnic groups with their disproportionately higher cancer incidence rates, with information on avoidable carcinogenic exposures, thus depriving them of their right-to-know and effectively preventing them from taking action to protect themselves _ a flagrant denial of environmental justice.
more info at:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Weight Loss Ebook - Secrets Revealed - Revised Edition$19.95  This is not only a weight loss program, it is also a plan for "TOTAL HEALTH". If you want a quick fix (taking metabolism boosters, etc.), only to gain more weight when you stop, do not even consider this program. Our program is designed to change the way you think and live your life. Change is only a decision away. You can do this! If you are motivated, and truly care about taking care of your body, and you are willing to make changes in your life, then this program is for you! - E-Book Version.(WL) |